My "i am not actully a developer, and i certantly havn't touched the
fnp code, so i actully have no clue, so this is all mass generalisations
and could be bullshit" opinion. :)
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 07:23:55AM -0500, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> The htl graph posted on cruft now and then shows that currently
> a htl of 19 gets most sites and that 25 is rarely necessary.
You're missing two very important points when reading cruft's
graph as an average of network reacability:
a) This is the front pages of each site - every time a site is
accesses, so are these, and most sites are accessed by someone
at least a few times a day (even just a nwebie clicking his way
through TFE), not to mention cruft's spider grabbing them 3 times
per day :-p
b) Today, we need a HTL of 19. But today, the network is significanlty
smaller than 0.5-release thanks to the network not scaling. Think to
the future, guys.
- fish
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 230 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20030110/6771ee4a/attachment.pgp>
