On Saturday 04 October 2008 02:23, Daniel Cheng wrote: > 2008/10/4 Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org>: > > On Friday 03 October 2008 17:27, Michael Rogers wrote: > >> Can't remember whether this has been raised before, but a random walk > >> terminates at a given node with probability proportional to the node's > >> degree; does this mean high-degree nodes are more likely to receive swap > >> requests than low-degree nodes? Seems like that could be disruptive in > >> two ways: > >> > >> 1) When a high-degree node changes its location, many other nodes are > >> affected. > > If you/vive/oskar are looking at the the degree thing... please review > this as well: > http://code.bulix.org/20bjpk-68537 > > This patch remove the opennet location from swapping -- > essentially seperating the darknet and openet.
Why would that be beneficial? You're still treating them as the same for routing purposes? > > >> 2) There might be some correlation between degree and other properties: > >> high-degree darknet nodes might belong to committed users with large > >> stores, in which case it's particularly disruptive if those nodes keep > >> moving. > >> > >> Just a thought. > > > > I don't know. This looks like a question for vive/oskar. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Michael > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Tech mailing list > > Tech at freenetproject.org > > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech > > > _______________________________________________ > Tech mailing list > Tech at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20081004/fbe8a85f/attachment.pgp>
