That's a separate mechanism (backoff).
On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 10:46:38AM +0100, Michael Rogers wrote: > >- If it is below 1000ms, we accept all requests. > >- If it is above 2000ms, we reject (almost) all requests. > >- If it is between we accept some requests but not all. > > If half your peers are overloaded but the other half are OK, would you > reject all requests with equal probability or selectively reject those > requests that would be forwarded to overloaded peers? > > Rather than taking the mean over all peers, how about rejecting requests > that would be forwarded to an overloaded peer, as determined by the > ratio between the peer's ping time over (say) the last minute and its > ping time over the lifetime of the connection? Or perhaps treat that > peer as temporarily disconnected and forward the request to the > next-best peer instead? > > Cheers, > Michael -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20060411/bdbc62b7/attachment.pgp>
