On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:45:29AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> The current bandwidth limiting mechanism seems to be causing serious
> problems.  It works by limiting the speed of transmission of data on a
> byte-per-byte basis.  Unfortunately this creates a situation where
> transfers of data occur more slowly, which means they take longer, which
> means that we have more concurrent transfers overall, which slows them
> down even further - and the cycle continues - with the entire Freenet 
> network getting bogged down in a web of extremely slow transfers.
> 
> The alternative is for a node to try to maximize the per-transfer 
> connection speed by rejecting new requests when the upstream connection 
> speed is maxed out.  Some claim that this is a terrible idea and will 

How will this limit output bandwidth, on even a minute by minute basis?
Users will regularly, and as part of the network's normal behaviour,
have their link saturated by unluckily having a few downloads from
people with fast links. Since we want people to run freenet 24x7 in the
background, in parallel to their regular browsing, this is a bad thing.

How will you limit incoming transfers?

Maybe this would limit messages reasonably accurately, otoh.

> screw up routing because it will be impossible to get a node to accept a 
> datarequest, but I disagree.  
> 
> Imagine you go to McDonalds and ask a server for some food, they take 
> your order.  Now, you didn't know, but that server is actually serving 
> 20 other people at the same time and consequently it takes you ages to 
> get your food.  Wouldn't it be better if that server said "Sorry Sir, 
> I'm really busy - please try another server".
> 
> In short, by making a node try to service its existing transfers as 
> quickly as it can, it gets them out of the way faster and can thus serve 
> just as many requests as a node which accepts all requests but takes 
> ages to serve each individual one.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Ian.
> 
> -- 
> Ian Clarke                                                [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Coordinator, The Freenet Project            http://freenetproject.org/
> Weblog                                     http://slashdot.org/~sanity/journal



-- 
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to