>We need to think about why NGR isn't benefiting from a similar >self-reenforcing effect. I don't think it is as simple as "its >estimates aren't good enough", any more than it is valid to say that >classic routing's routing decisions are perfect.
If we view classical routing as ngr with a single estimator, which is the distance between the requested key and the reference to the node, then this estimator is always 100% correct because we know both the requested key and the reference to the node with 100% accuracy.
Ngr is working with probabilities; in case where the estimates for the probability are severely off-track, which is possible when two or three estimated variables are somewhat off their actual values, the result of following the formula is as good as random. (and if my suspicion that the estimators give us highly erroneus values of <50% accuracy is true, then the whole thing is as random as random gets)
In both cases we route to the node which is the best candidate according to certain characteristics, but in the case of classic routing this decision is based on 100% accurate estimate. Even if the different nodes have different references for each other, the one that is the proper one will eventually spread to other nodes through reference passing, etc. In ngr, unless the error in each estimate is miniscule then the final result of many nodes using a formula with high error margin result in nearly random routing and will prevent the self-fulfilling proficy from happening.
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
