On Thursday 10 January 2008 23:35, Robert Hailey wrote:
> 
> On Jan 10, 2008, at 5:10 PM, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> 
> > With such an aggressive SEND_TIMEOUT, this borders on reviving  
> > NGRouting -
> > it's a major change to routing, which since it hasn't been simulated  
> > will
> > almost certainly cause major problems. No?
> 
> 
> I'm thinking that the SEND_TIMEOUT will need to be increased, I really  
> am not familiar with what the average network condition will be like.  
> Feel free to change the SEND_TIMEOUTs to your liking.

IMHO it should be equal to ACCEPTED_TIMEOUT. Although with message 
prioritisation I'm not sure conditionalSend does anything useful?
> 
> Also, I noticed that the htl is still decremented if we skip a peer w/  
> conditionalSend (or on disconnect).
> 
> On Jan 10, 2008, at 5:20 PM, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > Just because our queue of data to send to a node is full doesn't  
> > mean its
> > queue of data to send to us is full. Queue based load management  
> > would have
> > to take the latter into account. In fact, it would have to take not  
> > only the
> > data currently queued but also the data that is likely to become  
> > queued into
> > account. The liability limiting code works on this principle. Various
> > proposals for load management work similarly by passing back  
> > information on
> > how many requests can be made in the near future - but these will  
> > not be
> > deployed until they have been simulated.
> >
> > So please show me that this has no effect on routing, or revert it.
> 
> My initial impression was that with SEND_TIMEOUT being either  
> ACCEPTED_TIMEOUT (equivalent to sendAsync) or one minute (equivalent  
> to sendSync) that it would be the same. It does change the behavior  
> though (as the packet is withdrawn from the send queue, or not sent).  
> Until it can be simulated, I can simply flip the send back to  
> sendSync().
> 
> --
> Robert Hailey
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20080111/6f210b41/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to