On Friday 30 November 2007 08:54, Florent Daigni?re wrote: > > Obviously I expect the above will evolve over time. However, IMHO it would be > > significantly better at matching demand to supply than the current algorithm > > while not sacrificing routing, and would therefore be a major improvement in > > performance, which is one of the most important problems Freenet needs to > > deal with. > > You proposal is far away from tit-for-tat ... How do you prevent > leachers from forgetting to send a "I want to process requests" flag ?
Tit-for-tat can be layered on top of any sensible load management scheme (not easily on the current system though). It's not something we need to deal with right now. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20071130/29207991/attachment.pgp>
