+R4SAS
+RN_
+Stormycloud
+T3s|4
+dr|z3d
+hagen
+mareki2p
+orignal
+postman
+qend-irc2p
+snex
Arch
BubbRubb
Danny
DeltaOreo
FreefallHeavens
Irc2PGuest13210
Irc2PGuest20240
Irc2PGuest21940
Irc2PGuest32330
Irc2PGuest5631
Irc2PGuest74254
Irc2PGuest78101
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
Over
Sisyphus
Sleepy
SlippyJoe
T3s|4__
Teeed
Uncrushed
aargh2
ac9f_
acetone_
anontor2
b3t4f4c3__
cumlord
dr4wd3
duanin2
eyedeekay
eyedeekay_bnc
leopold
makoto
n1_
nilbog
onon_
poriori_
profetikla
r00tobo
rapidash
shiver_
thetia
u5657
uop23ip
vivid_reader56
w8rabbit
wodencafe2
x74a6
zelgomer
zzz
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