@eyedeekay
&zzz
+FreefallHeavens
+R4SAS
+RN
+RN_
+T3s|4
+cumlord
+dr|z3d
+eche|off
+mareki2p
+orignal
+postman
+qend-irc2p
+robin
+snex
+wodencafe
Arch
BubbRubb
Chrono
Danny
DeltaOreo
HowardPlayzOfAdmin
Irc2PGuest14159
Irc2PGuest28800
Irc2PGuest93285
Onn4l7h
Over
Sisyphus
Sleepy
SlippyJoe_
Stormycloud_
T3s|4_
Teeed
ac9f
acetone__
ardu
b3t4f4c3__
bak83_
coolbuddy799
dr4wd3_
duanin2
duck
eyedeekay_bnc
kaffi
leopold_
makoto
marek22k
nilbog
not_bob_afk
poriori
pory
profetikla
r00tobo_BNC
rapidash
shiver_
thetia
u5657
uop23ip
vivid_reader56
w8rabbit
x74a6
xHarr_
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