Matthew Toseland wrote: >> Would it be useful if we could distinguish between peers going offline >> and peers dropping the least-recently-used opennet connection - maybe >> add an extra field to FNPDisconnect (and assume the peer went offline if >> the connection just times out)? > > I think we do this already, don't we?
Doesn't look like it - OpennetManager calls PeerManager.disconnect, which doesn't tell the peer the reason for disconnecting AFAICT. >> What other factors do you think might >> bias the sample? > > Well for instance on a well established developer's node, the connections are > likely to be "good" connections, which tend to be nodes with big stores, lots > of bandwidth, and probably high uptimes (as that enables them to gather more > data). Good point, the measurement node should be separate from any well-known nodes (seednodes etc). We could track the average peer lifetime over time to see whether long-lived nodes really tend to have long-lived peers. If so, I guess short-lived nodes must tend to have short-lived peers - maybe that explains some of the problems experienced by new users? Cheers, Michael
