On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 03:49:00PM +0100, Michael Rogers wrote: > Matthew Toseland wrote: > >Because we have load propagation, it is entirely legitimate to > >send requests ANYWAY, and let upstream nodes deal with the slowness - > > I'm inclined to agree with this argument, but I'm not sure it follows > that we should send fewer requests to slow nodes. This will necessarily > lead to fast nodes getting a larger proportion of requests, even if they > don't get a larger absolute number of requests. Maybe that's acceptable, > but I think we should distinguish between two questions: > 1) should we rely on senders to slow down instead of backing off? > 2) should we send a smaller proportion of requests to slow nodes?
I think it is logical to send only a few requests to dial-up nodes. And we do rely on senders slowing down; backoff is to insulate the senders slowdown from the effects of really slow nodes receiving many requests. > > Cheers, > Michael -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20060809/7a3c136d/attachment.pgp>
