On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 21:49:29 -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > On Monday 16 October 2006 08:04, Florent Daigni?re wrote: >> * Ed Tomlinson <edt at aei.ca> [2006-10-16 08:01:51]: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > At toad's prompting I tried an experiment. The results were >> > interesting. I changed by output bandwidth limit to 100k/s. The >> > result. NO change in the output rates. It still averages about 5k/s >> > with peaks of about 20. >> > >> > Think there is something fishy with our bandwidth limitations. >> > >> > Ed >> >> Or our load-balancing scheme is too conservative... btw, increasing your >> bandwidth limit doesn't mean that your peers will be able to cope with >> the new amount of data nor that they will be willing to send your more. > > Problem, as I see it, is that we base output rates on the rates that we > recieve data from nodes. Most do not have symetric bandwidth (I have > 20-30x more input bandwidth). In other words, even though I limit my > output bandwidth, I can handle much more input 20-30x more input... > Freenet does not seem to understand this. > > Ed
But the input must come from someone. Every byte that's input to your is output to someone else. If most nodes indeed have 20-30x more input bandwidth than output bandwidth, then the speed of transfer is likely to be limited by the sneders output bandwidth rather than your input bandwidth. I suppose you could keep on adding more nodes, but if there's any kind of tit-for-tat system in place (I haven't really kept up to development :( ), then each individual node will devote even less of itsoutput bandwidth to you, since you'll have less and less output bandwidth to devote to it. Or, to put it simply: a network with asymmetric connections does not work well for two-way data exchange. There's nothing Freenet can do about this, it is a problem with network topology.
