&zzz
+FreefallHeavens
+R4SAS
+RN_
+StormyCloud
+acetone
+cims
+eche|off
+fa
+nilbog
+orignal
+postman
+psychopuck
+qend-irc2p
+rednode
+snex
+wodencafe
Arch
Dann
Irc2PGuest28384
Irc2PGuest63745
Irc2PGuest66257
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
Over1
Sisyphus_
Sleepy
T3s|4
U1F642
Watson
Zapek
aargh4
ahiru
ananas_
anontor2
calamares
dr4wd3
duanin2
justaperson
luvme2
makoto
marek22k
mareki2p_
maylay
n2
not_bob_afk
onon_
pinotto
poriori
profetikla
r00tobo
rapidash
sahil
test7363673
uop23ip
w8rabbit
x74a6
zelgomer
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