-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I don't think we necessarily have to prevent location swapping on opennet nodes, the destination sampling approach seems pretty robust, and as the network stabilizes, the number of location swaps should decrease.
But, a simple simulation of this would definitely be valuable. Ian. On 26 Jun 2006, at 13:17, Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 10:02:16PM +0200, Oskar Sandberg wrote: >> Matthew wrote: >>> I have no idea what you are talking about. >> >> Nodes that aren't worried about whoom they talk to can use >> destination >> sampling (like old Freenet, but with forced specialization). If >> nodes use >> this, it won't matter if they got in with some "matchmaking service". > > So opennet... Fix the node specialization, never swap it, and > connect to > destination (with LRU). This will comfortably interface with darknet > swapping? What about nodes which have both darknet and opennet > references? The hybrid would be messy - half the network (well > actually > 1% of the network) has location swapping and fixed links, and the > other > half (99%) has fixed specialization and mobile links... and the nodes > which are on both have a few fixed links, a swappable location, and > many > mobile links. > > This is sufficiently worrying that I'd have to see it simulated before > implementing it. And my gut feeling is that it will be considerably > more > difficult in terms of load management and routing churn. >> >> // oskar > -- > Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org > Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin) iD8DBQFEoFCmQtgxRWSmsqwRAoroAJ9MO+netbfsqqMdAGaPnAfQjIKIvwCbBUgI sS/UGjpoe/88NNwSVjToiq0= =4iMs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
