Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> writes: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 06:17:26PM -0600, Edgar Friendly wrote: > > So the code that deletes references when their backoff count gets > > above 6 is gone? If so, that's great. If not, it should be whacked. > And replaced with what? We can't "move nodes offline" and resurrect them > later unless we have some sort of metric for comparing an offline node > that we just managed to contact to an online node.
we can resurrect them later if we ever get a new reference for that node. Besides, we don't need to replace it with anything, just let the routing table fill with nodes that we're rarely going to try to contact; they'll be replaced by new refs anyway. > How? The average hoptime should have improved significantly in recent > months, modulo overloading and network upfuckage caused by lots of new > users and the seednodes and so on. and requests are being answered much faster now. Because of this, we should at least consider the effects of upping the maxHTL. > Yes but as the network gets bigger HTLs will have to increase anyway. If > we increase them a lot now, we lose the headway we will need. what headway? if we increase now, we'll still be able to increase later. > Yeah. There are many possible reasons for this. The presence of old > buggy nodes doesn't help, but there are lots and lots of potentially > serious problems affecting the network at the moment that might cause > DNFs. Is it about time to bump the Last Good Build? > Only if misused. And if you're gonna misuse freenet, you'll go download > Frost. The common case usage will likely be to get sites that are > eventually found. For example, trying to load TFE at five minutes past > midnight when it hasn't propagated fully yet, often takes a few tries > but almost always gets there in the end. I'm still worried about this idea of "propogation" being a dangerous one. I understand that requests succeed more often for content that has been requested a lot, but there's got to be something we can do to make normal insertion effective enough for keys not to need to propogate before being requestable by the majority of users. Hmm, maybe we could raise MaxHTL... > No but the browser does. The refresh goes into the HTML generated to > tell the user about a DNF. The browser will not do anything with this if > it's expecting an image. You're right; I had forgotten about that completely. I was still thinking fproxy was going to go off on its own and keep trying to request the key. > > -- > Matthew Toseland Thelema -- E-mail: thelema314 at swbell.net Raabu and Piisu GPG 1024D/36352AAB fpr:756D F615 B4F3 BFFC 02C7 84B7 D8D7 6ECE 3635 2AAB _______________________________________________ devl mailing list devl at freenetproject.org http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
