On Friday 25 January 2008 22:49, Michael Rogers wrote: > Matthew Toseland wrote: > > Okay, so are we agreed on: > > - A pDrop of 5%, determined at each request/retry. > > - Some form of per-node failure tables (requires modifications to ULPRs). > > - Fatal DNFs. > > All sound good. > > > - On an RNF or an RO, we toss the coin again. > > I don't think that's safe. Moving on if we get an RO or RL is fine, even > without tossing the coin again, but an RNF has visited some nodes > (potentially a lot of nodes). We shouldn't ever branch with probability > greater than pDrop, otherwise the average branching factor could be > greater than 1 under some circumstances, at which point the end times > will be upon us.
Of course it's safe. The average number of nodes visited will be 1/pDrop. Full stop. End of story. Because DNFs are fatal. If DNFs are not fatal then all bets are off and we have to consider it from the point of view of average branching factor, but as long as DNFs are fatal we're perfectly safe. Every node along the RNF path has individually a 1/pDrop chance of killing the entire request. > > > - Predictable mean visited nodes of 1/pDrop. > > Only if we never branch, ie RNFs and DNFs are fatal (which might be the > simplest solution). Not true, as I explain above. > > Cheers, > Michael -------------- 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/20080126/a3fbd888/attachment.pgp>
