On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 02:34:39AM -0400, Tavin Cole wrote: > On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 03:46:22PM +0200, Oskar Sandberg wrote: < > > > No, he has a point. When Node A reaches your threshhold for K and allows > > the next search through, then it will most probably not reset the > > DataSource on the reply. So it does cause the node to get queried less for > > K. > > Well, depends on the semantics of DataSource reset of course, such as whether > we decide to only cache on DataSource reset. But with the current model, > it's true that it could reduce the frequency of requests for that key. Hard > to quantify how much. But wouldn't this be good, since the requests would > be directed upstream?
Perhaps it could help as a means by which to keep data migratory, which is something that I value, but the arguments do seem a little fuzzy at this point. > Suppose the chance of killing the file were dependent on it's relationship > to the node's keyspace focus, either as self-analyzed or based on HTL values.. I'm worried about trying to define such things when we lack a proper mathematical model for the entire network. -- 'DeCSS would be fine. Where is it?' 'Here,' Montag touched his head. 'Ah,' Granger smiled and nodded. Oskar Sandberg oskar at freenetproject.org _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
