@eyedeekay
&zzz
+R4SAS
+RN
+RN_
+StormyCloud
+T3s|4
+dr|z3d
+hagen
+hk
+not_bob_afk
+orignal
+postman
+qend-irc2p
+segfault
+snex
+weko
+wodencafe
Arch
BubbRubb
Danny
DeltaOreo
FreefallHeavens
HowardPlayzOfAdmin
Irc2PGuest24266
Irc2PGuest52560
Irc2PGuest59134
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
SigSegv
Sisyphus
Sleepy
T3s|4_
T3s|4__
Teeed
acetone_
ardu
b3t4f4c3__
bak83_
boonst
carried6590
cumlord
dr4wd3_
duck
elthommy
eyedeekay_bnc
hectobit
mareki2p_
onon_1
poriori_
profetikla
r3med1tz-
rapidash
shiver_
solidx66
thetia
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