Surely P_dnf should include both the node AND the key? On Sun, Jun 29, 2003 at 07:48:42PM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > On June 29, 2003 07:24 pm, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > P_best_dnf()*dnf_time(node,key)*htl+(P_dnf(node)-P_best_dnf())* > > > global_success_estimate(key) > > > > You aren't taking into account the time required for the first node to > > DNF before re-requesting. > > > > This solves that problem: > > > > P_best_dnf()*dnf_time(node,key)*htl+(P_dnf(node)-P_best_dnf())* > > (dnf_time(node,key)*htl + global_success_estimate(key)) > > > If I factor correctly this works out to: > > P_dnf(node)*dnf_time(node,key)*htl+ > (P_dnf(node)-P_best_dnf())*global_success_estimate(key) > > Still like it? > > > > I will also look at putting a switch that allows ng to be turned on > > > and off. > > > > Indeed - I would like to get this in unstable ASAP switched off by > > default (or at least somewhere that it can be more widely tested). > > Problem is that, no mater what, it will change routing as the code is > all based on the stuff I previously posted to devl. My personal > preference would be to sync experimental to unstable and update > it with the code. > > Ed > _______________________________________________ > devl mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
-- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
