===== From: Stef Hi Arne,
switching to english, in case you want to forward. from looking over the logs¹ (I hope I found all the points concerning us ;) ), one main point of discussion is the simulation study about the impact of a suboptimal distance distribution on the routing. 1) The study is, as already noted in some of the logs, not really realistic, because we use neither caching nor churn nor FOAF-routing. It only shows that the routing performance in Kleinberg's model (so an artificial network model) is drastically decreased if long-range neighbors are chosen uniformly at random rather than proportional to 1/d (d = distance). We changed Kleinberg's model slightly to allow for arbitrary degree distributions and used the measured degree distribution in Freenet. An implementation can be found here: https://github.com/stef-roos/GTNA/blob/grouting/src/gtna/networks/model/smallWorld/KleinbergDegreeDist.java So the actual hop counts are likely very different in the real network (so best forget about those numbers ;)). However, it seems reasonable that the routing in actual Freenet Opennet is worse than it could be as well. (caching might mitigate the effect to some extent...) 2) differences to Oscar's simulation: Which simulation are you referring to? I assume those in Distributed Routing in Small-World networks, where he compared random ID placements for Darknets with swapping? well, he used a rather high uniform degree (6 log_2 n are more than 80 neighbors per node) for all nodes while we used a non-uniform degree distribution with a lot of nodes with a degree of less than 10, that will lead to different results, especially if the assignment is random and the target is found by chance because it is the neighbor of a contacted node... 3) yeah, binning and restricting connections, not exactly an elegant solution, but it seems like you couldn't think of anything better either... I considered doing some strange statistical tests for checking locally if the neighbor selection could be generated by a Kleinberg distribution, but the locally available samples are probably too small for significant results. Even if they were, a test saying that the distribution is not good does not tell you what to do *sigh* anyway, cool that you figured out why the distance distribution is that strange, we tried by looking at the code, but didn't find the reason there ;) ---snip funding note--- Greets, Stef ¹: Logs: http://127.0.0.1:8888/freenet:SSK@Dtz9FjDPmOxiT54Wjt7JwMJKWaqSOS-UGw4miINEvtg,cuIx2THw7G7cVyh9PuvNiHa1e9BvNmmfTcbQ7llXh2Q,AQACAAE/irclogs-1073/ https://d6.gnutella2.info/freenet/SSK@Dtz9FjDPmOxiT54Wjt7JwMJKWaqSOS-UGw4miINEvtg,cuIx2THw7G7cVyh9PuvNiHa1e9BvNmmfTcbQ7llXh2Q,AQACAAE/irclogs-1073/ and http://127.0.0.1:8888/freenet:SSK@Dtz9FjDPmOxiT54Wjt7JwMJKWaqSOS-UGw4miINEvtg,cuIx2THw7G7cVyh9PuvNiHa1e9BvNmmfTcbQ7llXh2Q,AQACAAE/irclogs-1074/ https://d6.gnutella2.info/freenet/SSK@Dtz9FjDPmOxiT54Wjt7JwMJKWaqSOS-UGw4miINEvtg,cuIx2THw7G7cVyh9PuvNiHa1e9BvNmmfTcbQ7llXh2Q,AQACAAE/irclogs-1074/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
