On 06-02-06 20:49, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote: > On Feb 6, 2006, at 4:12 AM, Tony Hoyle wrote: >> Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote: >>> I've added something that should help servers on small bandwidth >>> significantly. >> >> Personally I'd prefer a checkbox - it's more obvious. > > I did consider that. I can see the appeal in giving the server > operators more fine control like that, but I'm not sure it's in the > best interest of the pool.
If it keeps people donating their servers then it is in the interest ;) > I'm planning to change the netspeed to just be "low, standard, high, > very high" or some such instead of the absolute bandwidth (which My guess is that the people leaving are leaving for the total amount of traffic, not because of the bandwidth. Many providers use limitations like xGB/month (mine has not:-) Not being in the global/continental pool can help a lot. With an ADSL connection of 6Mb/768kb I can handle many requests. To provide the best service to 'nice' clients, I have a drop policy. Outbound traffic is shaped so the outgoing ntp delay is low, and no congestion in the modem will occur. However, with your current settings you will remove me from the global pool... (I set it to 1.5Mbit for now) Perhaps you can organize a poll on the website (don't know how easy/difficult that is)? The question for people in the pool (via 'manage server') "Why would you consider leaving the pool?", and answers: "not considering to leave", "peak traffic", "bandwidth", "total traffic", "abusers", "other" (with some space to specify). On the public space, you could ask "Why don't you join the pool?", with answers "not 24/7 online", "no static IP-nr", "traffic limit of ISP", "no bandwidth", "just don't want to". Arnold &:-) _______________________________________________ timekeepers mailing list [email protected] https://fortytwo.ch/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/timekeepers
