>Is there a serious problem with node location stability? Oskar's >simulations suggest not. Anything which impacts location swapping will >need to be simulated, of course.
Well... I can only talk for myself, but my own node's location is changing often to total different values. Yesterday I was at about 0.4 and at this moment I am around 0.1 . Note that I did not add or remove peers in between. With the size of the current network, I think that a change of about 0.3 is extremely big and unwanted. Anyway, I am unsure how serious this problem is. So far, I am able to retrieve all Freesites inside Freenet .7 , also old ones. Maybe when the network grows, it's harder to find keys and it does seems to be a serious problem. >My main concern with treating offline nodes as online for purposes of >swapping is that swaps cannot involve those offline nodes; they are >static for the period while they are offline, this may not be good for >location swapping. Agreed on. Most optimistic view against that is that when the node comes back on he will have the same location. If a swap occurs, no matter how you treat off-line nodes, the effect for the offline node is none untill it gets back on. As long as we will not have much DNF's, as told above, this is probably not an issue. >On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 04:25:40PM +0200, Ruud Javi wrote: > > The following text is describing a way to have a more stable node >location, > > by treating temporary offline nodes as online nodes. > > > > The location of your node is depending on your neighbors. If your > > neighbor?s locations are all around 0.5, then your node will also try to > > get a location close to 0.5 > > > > When somebody is inserting content into Freenet, specific keys will go >to > > specific locations. Others are able to retrieve this content as long as > > your node is at that location (or close). For that reason it?s a good >thing > > if a node would stay at a specific location. > > > > If the network is stable, no location-swaps would occur. The network >would > > not be stable if nodes join the network or leave the network. This can >be > > as well temporary (non 24/7 nodes) or permanent (nodes joining/leaving). > > > > Against permanent changes is not that much possible; when new nodes >arrive > > it is necessary that this has an effect on node locations. > > > > Against temporary changes we can do something. If a neighbor of you >would > > go offline (bedtime), your node would choose another location, as most > > optimal. Instead of this your node could just treat the offline node as >an > > online node for some time (perhaps 24 hours). Of course your node could >not > > change the location with an offline node, but it could decide not to >change > > location with an online node. The idea is that once the offline node >would > > come back online, you would want your old location back. > > > > In this way your node?s location would most probably be more stable as >the > > current situation. > > > > Last questions: > > - Is a more stable node location a big advantage? > > - Will routing be worse if a lot of your neighbors are temporary > > offline and you would not change node location? >-- >Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org >Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ >ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. ><< signature.asc >> >_______________________________________________ >Devl mailing list >Devl at freenetproject.org >http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl _________________________________________________________________ MSN Search, for accurate results! http://search.msn.nl
