&eche|on
&zzz
+FreefallHeavens
+R4SAS
+RN_
+Romster
+StormyCloud
+acetone
+cims
+eche|off
+hagen
+nilbog
+not_bob_afk
+nyaa2pguy
+orignal
+postman
+psychopuck
+snex
+utp
+wodencafe
Arch
Dann
Holmes
Irc2PGuest11974
Irc2PGuest23667
Irc2PGuest28384
Irc2PGuest59568
Irc2PGuest82390
NiceBoat_
OfficialCIA
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
Over
SilentWave
Sisyphus
Sleepy
Zapek
aargh4
ac9f
ahiru
ananas__
anontor
calamares
dr4wd3
dr|z3d
duanin2
fa
leopold
mahlay
makoto
marek22k
n2_
poriori
profetikla
qend-irc2p_
r00tobo
rapidash
test7363673
thetia
uop23ip
urist_
user1
vivid_reader56
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