@eyedeekay
&zzz
+R4SAS
+RN
+RN_
+StormyCloud
+acetone
+cumlord
+dr|z3d
+eche|off
+orignal
+postman
+qend-irc2p
+snex
+wodencafe
Arch
BubbRubb
Chrono
Dann
DeltaOreo
FreefallHeavens
HowardPlayzOfAdmin
Irc2PGuest14886
Irc2PGuest16546
Irc2PGuest82658
Irc2PGuest83248
Onn4l7h
Sisyphus
Sleepy
SlippyJoe
T3s|4
T3s|4_
Teeed
aargh2
ac9f
b3t4f4c3___
bak83
coolbuddy799
dr4wd3
duanin2
duck
leopold
makoto
mareki2p_
nilbog-
not_bob_afk
profetik1
r00tobo_BNC
rapidash
shiver_1
solidx66
thetia
tr
u5657
uop23ip
vivid_reader56
w8rabbit
x74a6
obscuratus
eyedeekay: PeerSelector is a more involved issue than I first appreciated.
obscuratus
I was reviewing the FloodFillPeerSelector class, and I couldn't see anywhere where it understood how to use any other netDb except for the primary floodfill netdb.
obscuratus
On the plus side, things seem to work OK dispite this being somewhat borked.
obscuratus
We may need to pivot to something like relying on trip-wires for RI coming in the Inbound Message Distributor.
obscuratus
As a work-around, on my testing network, it wouldn't be difficult at all to make sure the subDbs are populated exhaustively with every FF RI.
obscuratus
Or, maybe begin testing the nested netdbs without any RI at all, and make sure nothing breaks when we run that way.
obscuratus
I'm almost running that way now, with only the minimum 3 FF in each subdb.
eyedeekay
Thanks for the update, my next move will probably be in the direction of no RI's in subDb's first