Re: [freenet-dev] Why preemptively QRej?

2002-07-01 Thread Oskar Sandberg
On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 11:44:19AM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote: You have presented no convincing argument for removing this limit. I vote that we stick to _one_ Ian... -- Oskar Sandberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-dev] Why preemptively QRej?

2002-07-01 Thread Gianni Johansson
On Monday 01 July 2002 20:29, you wrote: On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 11:44:19AM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote: You have presented no convincing argument for removing this limit. I vote that we stick to _one_ Ian... Good to have to back on the list Oskar ;-) -- Freesite (0.4)

Re: [freenet-dev] Why preemptively QRej?

2002-06-27 Thread Pascal
outboundRequestLimit is incremented in only two places. SendAnnouncement.java line 129 and Pending.java line 352. Both of these places are counting OUTBOUND requests. outboundRequestLimit does NOT count inbound requests. It is at no time compared to inbound requests. I'll say it again: It

Re: [freenet-dev] Why preemptively QRej?

2002-06-27 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 01:07:12AM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote: On Wednesday 26 June 2002 23:30, Pascal wrote: The reason these limits are there is to keep badly behaved nodes from DOSing the rest of freenet. There were situations where nodes would try to send hundreds of times more

Re: [freenet-dev] Why preemptively QRej?

2002-06-26 Thread Matthew Toseland
I recommend you try just doubling the maxThreads setting in your freenet.conf. This should provide a similar result. We need a way to work out the optimal load maximum at configuration time... or adjust it dynamically. On Wed, Jun 26, 2002 at 05:31:01PM -0700, Tril wrote: I setup a node on a

Re: [freenet-dev] Why preemptively QRej?

2002-06-26 Thread Pascal
If the diff below is complete, your changes have done nothing other than remove the notification to you when incoming connections are being rejected. The actual rejecting of connections is not handled by rejectingRequests(). If you'd like to see what actually happens when your node ignores the

Re: [freenet-dev] Why preemptively QRej?

2002-06-26 Thread Gianni Johansson
On Wednesday 26 June 2002 23:30, Pascal wrote: The reason these limits are there is to keep badly behaved nodes from DOSing the rest of freenet. There were situations where nodes would try to send hundreds of times more requests than they could answer. It isn't a good idea for nodes to try

Re: [freenet-dev] Why preemptively QRej?

2002-06-26 Thread Pascal
That would make sense, unfortunately that's not how it's currently implemented. With default values, all outboundRequestLimit does is make the node QRej requests not in it's DS or FT if it has sent more than 60 requests in a minute. It doesn't care how many requests the node has received. Nor