@eyedeekay
&eche|on
&kytv
&zzz
+R4SAS
+RN
+RN_
+acetone
+dr|z3d
+hk
+lbt
+postman
+weko
+wodencafe
An0nm0n
Arch
Dann
DeltaOreo
FreefallHeavens
GucciferZ
Irc2PGuest35128
Irc2PGuest43186
Irc2PGuest59134
Irc2PGuest61987
Irc2PGuest97364
Irc2PGuest99418
Leopold
Nausicaa
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
Over1
Sisyphus
Sleepy
SoniEx2
T3s|4_
T3s|4__
anon
b3t4f4c3__
bak83
boonst
carried6590
cumlord
dr4wd3
eyedeekay_bnc
l337s
not_bob_afk
orignal
poriori_
profetikla
qend-irc2p_
r3med1tz-
radakayot_
rapidash
scottpedia
segfault
shiver_
solidx66_
syncthing2
trust
u5657
uop23ip
w8rabbit
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