On Monday 25 October 2010 16:56:23 Robert Hailey wrote: > > On 2010/10/23 (Oct), at 1:55 PM, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > Proposal: Only route high HTL requests (say 15+) to nodes which are > > no longer "newbies", that is, which have uptime of over 5 minutes. > > Nodes which are newbie are not dropped even if they are at the > > bottom of the LRU; nodes over this have survived through being useful. > > > > This should increase the cost of attacks involving maintaining > > connections to lots of opennet peers. > > > > The catch is that this might affect routing resulting in new nodes > > having too few long links??? > > I think you over-estimate the disruption. On the positive side, not > routing requests to new-nodes (or at least not as a first choice) > might avoid the temporary dead-ends created by bootstrapping nodes.
Not routing new requests to new nodes. > > Of course if we never route to a "new" node, it will never prove > itself and graduate from being "new". It would get non-new requests. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20101025/6b1f2c29/attachment.pgp>
