On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 05:25:58PM +0000, Michael Rogers wrote: > Matthew Toseland wrote: > > The other possibility is that this is happening naturally somehow. My > > theory was that the node moves peripheral locations to peripheral nodes, > > and then the peripheral nodes drop off the network. > > That would explain how there could be more than one cluster. If that's > the cause, periodically resetting to a random location should help, right?
Would it? Or would it drive the system to be more and more absurdly specialized? Currently, a node is introduced; its location is well within the core area of keyspace; we swap locations with a core node, and the peripheral node gets a peripheral location. Then the peripheral node disconnects, and the peripheral location is destroyed. So the keyspace gets more and more clustered towards a single point (or multiple points). This doesn't however explain why the cluster we see is around 0.0/1.0. Anyway, would periodic resetting help? I dunno. A new location if it was peripheral would still be moved to a peripheral node; a new location which was close to the core would be moved to a core node. However, these are no longer tied to the addition or removal of nodes, so they have more time to hang around on the network before they are removed... So I suppose it would help. Anyone feel like running some simulations to confirm the theory and the fix? > > Cheers, > Michael -------------- 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/20070115/33d82233/attachment.pgp>
