gpg: Signature made Mon Apr 24 18:58:20 2006 UTC using DSA key ID 6554A22D
gpg: Good signature from "Matthew John Toseland (Toad) <toad@amphibian.dyndns.org>"
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 04:51:47PM -0400, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On 4/21/06, Matthew Toseland <toad@???> wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 06:23:54PM -0400, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> > > On 4/15/06, Lars Juel Nielsen <lars.j.nielsen@???> wrote:
> > > > That sounds like a quite bad idea if the small world theory and our
> > > > routing algorithm works.
> > > > At least according to my understanding of it.
> > >
> > > The alternative is that I drastically reduce the number of peerings I
> > > have to improve the chances that my close-friends are able to stay
> > > connected. ... but then I become part of a small subgraph myself and
> > > become more likely a victim of partitioning.
> >
> > What is the implicit problem here?
> >
> > Please explain your complaint, not just your proposed solution.
>
> Did you miss my initial post?
> I know I'm long winded, but the first three paragraphs explain the problem.
>
> I have many peers. One is a close friend who trusts me and cares about
> his anonymity. He is only connected to freenet via me and perhaps one
> other node.
>
> My node gets busy with its other peers, and my friend ends up backed
> off and partitioned from freenet.
Well it doesn't happen here and I suspect I have more peers than you do.
Long term backoff is a bug, or a severely overloaded node for some local
reason.
>
> I can reduce my peers, but then the chances of me becoming partitioned
> are increased.
--
Matthew J Toseland - toad@???
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
