Is there a serious problem with node location stability? Oskar's
simulations suggest not. Anything which impacts location swapping will
need to be simulated, of course.
Well... I can only talk for myself, but my own node's location is changing
often to total different values. Yesterday I was at about 0.4 and at this
moment I am around 0.1 . Note that I did not add or remove peers in between.
With the size of the current network, I think that a change of about 0.3 is
extremely big and unwanted.
Anyway, I am unsure how serious this problem is. So far, I am able to
retrieve all Freesites inside Freenet .7 , also old ones. Maybe when the
network grows, it's harder to find keys and it does seems to be a serious
problem.
My main concern with treating offline nodes as online for purposes of
swapping is that swaps cannot involve those offline nodes; they are
static for the period while they are offline, this may not be good for
location swapping.
Agreed on. Most optimistic view against that is that when the node comes
back on he will have the same location. If a swap occurs, no matter how you
treat off-line nodes, the effect for the offline node is none untill it gets
back on.
As long as we will not have much DNF's, as told above, this is probably not
an issue.
On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 04:25:40PM +0200, Ruud Javi wrote:
> The following text is describing a way to have a more stable node
location,
> by treating temporary offline nodes as online nodes.
>
> The location of your node is depending on your neighbors. If your
> neighbor?s locations are all around 0.5, then your node will also try to
> get a location close to 0.5
>
> When somebody is inserting content into Freenet, specific keys will go
to
> specific locations. Others are able to retrieve this content as long as
> your node is at that location (or close). For that reason it?s a good
thing
> if a node would stay at a specific location.
>
> If the network is stable, no location-swaps would occur. The network
would
> not be stable if nodes join the network or leave the network. This can
be
> as well temporary (non 24/7 nodes) or permanent (nodes joining/leaving).
>
> Against permanent changes is not that much possible; when new nodes
arrive
> it is necessary that this has an effect on node locations.
>
> Against temporary changes we can do something. If a neighbor of you
would
> go offline (bedtime), your node would choose another location, as most
> optimal. Instead of this your node could just treat the offline node as
an
> online node for some time (perhaps 24 hours). Of course your node could
not
> change the location with an offline node, but it could decide not to
change
> location with an online node. The idea is that once the offline node
would
> come back online, you would want your old location back.
>
> In this way your node?s location would most probably be more stable as
the
> current situation.
>
> Last questions:
> - Is a more stable node location a big advantage?
> - Will routing be worse if a lot of your neighbors are temporary
> offline and you would not change node location?
--
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
<< signature.asc >>
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Search, for accurate results! http://search.msn.nl
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
