On Saturday 10 March 2007 17:07, Bill Pringlemeir wrote: > I had considered augmenting hosts, ultras to include a vendor name > (if we have discovered the vendor); a blank would be "random". This > *might* allow less connections attempts to fulfill the monopoly > requirements. It could also give a GTKG ultra more diversity on > average.
This sounds like a good idea. When I set an anti-monopoly requirement to avoid falling back into one niche, it seems finding a matching UP produces unnecessarily much overhead the with the current way to do it. bye, Hauke Hachmann ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Gtk-gnutella-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gtk-gnutella-devel
