@eyedeekay
&zzz
+R4SAS
+RN
+RN_
+T3s|4
+acetone
+dr|z3d
+hk
+not_bob_afk
+orignal
+postman
+qend-irc2p
+snex
+wodencafe
Arch
BravoOreo
BubbRubb1
C341
Chrono
Daddy
Danny
FreefallHeavens
HowardPlayzOfAdmin
Irc2PGuest29259
Irc2PGuest33339
Irc2PGuest34005
Irc2PGuest44326
Irc2PGuest77721
Leopold_xmpp_
Onn4l7h
Over
SigSegv
Sisyphus_
Sleepy
St1nt
T3s|4_
Teeed
aargh
ardu
b3t4f4c3
bak83
cumlord
cumlord_
dr4wd3_
duanin2
eyedeekay_bnc
hagen_
kaffi
nilbog
nnm--
ohThuku1_
poriori
pory
profetikla
r00tobo
rapidash
shiver_
solidx66_
thetia
u5657
uop23ip
w8rabbit
wew
x74a6
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