> You don't consider having to route data though other nodes all the time a > slowdown?
There might be a latency cost for the *first node* to request data along a path, but that's far outweighed by the latency savings when *every subsequent requester* can get it from nearby rather than far away. If you increase the first node's latency by 20%, and then save 50% for each of the next nine, your overall average latency drops by more than 40%. This effect persists even for fairly modest cache hit rates. There might be a lot of ways that you'd want to change away from the way Freenet has done things, but the caching strategy is probably not one of them. A very large number of very intelligent people have done a lot of work trying to find better methods, but you'd be hard pressed to find any for which there's an efficiency gain to balance the additional complexity. _______________________________________________ freenet-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/tech
