-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 26 Apr 2006, at 10:57, Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 09:49:17AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: >> I think when we have applications that explicitly rely on requesting >> keys that probably haven't been inserted yet, the proportion of >> successful requests is not a good measure of the network's >> effectiveness. >> >> A good measure of the network's effectiveness is to manually insert >> keys at one node, and request those keys from another node, >> preferably one that is as far as possible from the first in the >> network topology, while monitoring the success rate. > > That is probably true. But there needs to be a time lag to establish > whether there is a problem with the data not keeping up with the > location swaps.
A good test will insert a bunch of CHKs, and then request them over a period of time, say, one an hour for a week. That way, if retrievability decreases with time, we will see the extent of this problem. Ian. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin) iD8DBQFET7UdQtgxRWSmsqwRAnthAJ4pFG5jcZfnNO6AIrexQmSdtT8+CwCfc7Xx jldfuO8UxADVnU+UrKA2Wf4= =BbJB -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
