On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 03:38:01PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote: > On 1/3/07, Jano <alejandro at mosteo.com> wrote: > > Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > PROBEALL: requests (telnet to 2323 and type PROBEALL: then tail -f > > > wrapper.log), and implementation of spying on other nodes' swaps, seem > > > to confirm the prior observations that: > > > - Locations of nodes are strongly clustered around 0.0. > > > > If I'm not mistaken, 0.0 is not a special location (besides being the warp > > point from 1.0). So this clustering towards zero doesn't seem a natural > > process. Even if there were reasons for the nodes getting naturally > > concentrated around some location, then it could be anything and not > > precisely 0.0? > > You are not mistaken, even if there is a "natural" reason for > clustering, there is no reason other than pure chance that it would be > 0.0. This is definitely suspicious, and suggests a bug in how > distances between locations is calculated, however the pieces of code > responsible for that look fine.
Did you get my email explaining how this might happen, just before christmas? > > Curiouser and curiouser. > > Ian. > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > -------------- 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/20070115/1aeea107/attachment.pgp>
