On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 09:08:59AM +0200, Lars Juel Nielsen wrote: > On 4/16/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 4/15/06, Lars Juel Nielsen <lars.j.nielsen at gmail.com> wrote: > > > That sounds like a quite bad idea if the small world theory and our > > > routing algorithm works. > > > At least according to my understanding of it. > > > > The alternative is that I drastically reduce the number of peerings I > > have to improve the chances that my close-friends are able to stay > > connected. ... but then I become part of a small subgraph myself and > > become more likely a victim of partitioning. > > > > There isn't much point to the darknet model if we must force people to > > peer promiscuously in order to maintain global connectivity.
Do we? > > Promiscuous peering may not be the best think in relating to getting > the routing protocol working optimally. True. -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20060421/4efcb7f8/attachment.pgp>
