&zzz
+FreefallHeavens
+R4SAS
+RN_
+Romster
+T3s|4
+acetone
+eche|off
+mareki2p
+nilbog
+nyaa2pguy
+orignal
+postman
+qend-irc2p
+wodencafe
Arch
Daddy_I2P
Danny
Irc2PGuest15434
Irc2PGuest16019
Irc2PGuest20377
Irc2PGuest31938
Irc2PGuest35412
Irc2PGuest48148
Irc2PGuest77921
MatrixBot
NiceBoat
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
Over
Sisyphus
Teeed
aargh4
ahiru
ananas
anontor
b3t4f4c3__
cims
dr4wd3_
duanin2
ice_juice
mahlay
makoto
marek
n2
noidea
not_bob_afk2
o3d3
poriori
profetikla
r00tobo
rapidash
rednode
solidx66
stormycloud[m]
sublimia
test7363673
uop23ip
urist_
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