On Tuesday 15 September 2009 01:51:32 Evan Daniel wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Evan Daniel <evanbd at gmail.com> wrote:
> > There are several confounding factors. ?First, the data aren't
> > independent; there should be local clustering, and I seem to have
> > double-counted the links to my node (18 out of 353 data points) (links
> > between my peers would also be double-counted, but there don't appear
> > to be any). ?Second, there's the bandwidth issue: some of my peers are
> > faster than others, as can be seen from their varied number of FOAF
> > locations. ?Peers with more FOAF locations will receive more traffic,
> > in (rough) proportion to the number of FOAF locations they have. ?I'm
> > uncertain how the link length distribution should respond; perhaps a
> > link to a peer should be counted n times, where n is the number of
> > FOAF locations it advertises? ?Or perhaps not; figuring that out would
> > take some theoretical work I haven't done. ?On average, across a large
> > number of nodes / links, that effect should go away. ?Third, we must
> > be wary of observer bias: nodes that connect to other nodes are more
> > likely to be observed by a random sample of nodes. ?This will impact
> > FOAF link length counting, but not local link length counting.
> 
> Sorry, there are some inaccuracies above:
> My node had 16 peers in that dataset (not 18).  There are 33 duplicate
> locations in the full listing.  15 of those represent duplicates of my
> node's location.  The remaining 18 are repeated counts of nodes other
> than mine: either my node connected to nodes A and B, which are
> connected to each other (and therefore each counted twice), or my node
> connected to nodes A and B, both of which are connected to a common
> node C (which isn't connected to my node).

So some of your peers *do* connect to each other?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20090916/af729f74/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to