Quoting Haxe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> from ml.softs.gtk-gnutella.devel: :I think it's a bit hard to simply drop Queries with a bit too high TTL. :An intermittent UP should of course clip that TTL to a max value. But I :am not a UP, I am a leaf node. The Query has successfully reached my :host. Why not process it and answer with an according TTL so that the :QHit will also reach its destination?
Because that query was relayed by too many hops, meaning it comes from the "old" Gnutella network, the one that blindly broadcasts. Such servents are a nuisance, and therefore their users should upgrade. I don't care if they don't get what they're looking for if they use an old Gnutella servent. Why do you think GTKG has a one-year lifetime? Because Gnutella is a very dynamic network. In one year from now, I'm sure there will be new features available. And some features are more important than others. Here, high outdegree, dynamic querying and last-hop QRP for ultrapeers are very structuring changes. :If it were only for 1%, I'd agree to simply drop. But we are talking :about 50% here. That's rough. Blame the users of those servents! Everyone should use the latest version available, whatever the vendor is. And if the servent is no longer maintained, then nobody should use it. If I stop making new releases today, nobody should be able to use gtk-gnutella one year from now. And that is a good thing. Raphael ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ Gtk-gnutella-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gtk-gnutella-devel
