On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Matthew Toseland <t...@amphibian.dyndns.org> wrote: > On Thursday 22 Nov 2012 00:22:25 Juiceman wrote: >> Sent from my wireless phone. >> On Nov 21, 2012 6:55 PM, "Matthew Toseland" <t...@amphibian.dyndns.org> >> wrote: >> > >> > On Monday 19 Nov 2012 16:09:02 Juiceman wrote: >> > > Sent from my wireless phone. >> > > On Nov 19, 2012 10:24 AM, "Juiceman" <juicema...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Idea for automated seednode collection: >> > > > >> > > > Could official seednodes pass a list of second tier seednodes that >> > > newbies can try to connect to when official nodes are overloaded? >> > > > >> > > > Implementation: >> > > > >> > > > When an official seednode accepts a newbie node for announcement it >> > > checks if that node has its "be a seednode" flag set. It puts this >> node on >> > > a list of potential volunteers. >> > > > >> > > > After 30 minutes of not being connected to the volunteer: >> > > > The official seednode then tries to connect to the newbie to test its >> > > firewall and that it accepts an announcement attempt. If everything >> looks >> > > good it adds this node to a list of volunteer nodes that can be doled >> out >> > > to the future newbies that connect. >> > > >> > > Clarification: the reason we wait 30 minutes is to give the new >> volunteers >> > > time to settle into the network and make sure they stuck around. >> > > >> > > I suggest we make it so volunteers can't dole out their own list of >> > > sub-volunteers somehow or else routing will be fubared. Perhaps when >> > > volunteer nodes get connected they fetch the latest list of official >> > > seednodes from Freenet and if they are not on it disable handing out >> their >> > > list of their own volunteers. >> > > >> > > Let's make it so seednodes don't hand out second tiers until they >> > > themselves have been up for 30 minutes. This gives time to check >> whether >> > > they are official seednodes and settle into the network. Seednodes >> should >> > > not persist their volunteer list past shutdown so they collect fresh >> > > volunteers and don't hand out ancient lists. >> > >> > Interesting. Isn't it better to only have mature nodes, with good >> connections, fast bandwidth, and so on? There are probably a lot more such >> nodes than are in the seednodes list at the moment. >> > >> > I do think the user should be asked if we add them to the seednodes. >> > >> > Also, what is the point of secondary nodes anyway if they're not gonna be >> in the main list? I mean once you've connected to a primary seednode you >> can announce through that - this is added to your seednodes list for backup >> purposes for later on? One problem with that is it would increase the >> Internet Background Radiation impact of Freenet, since we don't know when >> the secondary seednode goes down; with the main seednodes, we update the >> list, and hopefully we will soon update it even when we are behind the >> latest version (using UOM). >> >> This would be an automated system that wouldn't require users emailing >> someone to add them to the list. > > At the moment the plan is to detect when a node is eligible to be a seednode, > ask the user to configure it, and then periodically contact a central server.
Long term we need something better than your plan (or my idea) like inserting to a central node within Freenet. Enhancement to my idea: Perhaps official seednodes could insert their list of volunteers to a USK key (listed in their ark?) that could be polled by whoever is creating and inserting the official project USK seednodes list. This central person\node can compile a list from all the official seednodes. If the seednode flag was part of a noderef, then this central person\node can poll the volunteers arks and this flag to determine when to add or remove a volunteer from the official seednodes list. Then volunteers can come and go as needed. I will actual start a new email thread and rewrite this as a more coherent proposal. Stay tuned. >> >> If they have selected the checkbox to be a seednode aren't they opting in? >> >> How long does an announcement take to complete so the seednode can >> disconnect? If a seednode could say "i'm overloaded, here are some other >> seednodes" in a quick message to some of the nodes waiting to announce it >> would help, no? > > Maybe. It would be a bit faster, but more complex. Wouldn't it just be better > to have a single global seednodes list with more nodes in? We can always > slice it up for individual installs. >> >> The seednodes forget the volunteer list on shutdown so those nodes won't >> keep getting spammed. Also the official seednode could rotate the list it >> hands out. > > So the recipient tries to connect to it and then eventually gives up and > forgets it? It doesn't store the references for the alternates? > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl@freenetproject.org > https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl -- I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it. - Voltaire Those who would give up Liberty, to purchase temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Ben Franklin _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
