Geographic location is definitely a factor affecting latency, although not that much as it was. Nowadays ISP's trade the traffic deficits to reconcile and it frequently happens that traffic is routed via least cost, rather then least latency route. In most cases you are right, but it's not the rule. On another hand, current FIFO blocking topology shall cause additional overheat especially while forking (the rejected block is operation that do not count towards the score) and nodes that handle many connections leading to much better "fair distribution" of traffic. Bad block not only increases latency as first factor but also increases number of rejected blocks as second one leading to lower score. With better latency, theoretically forks are unlikely to happen as there is less chances that 2 nodes produce the block at the same time. The FIFO blocking principle (that we currently have as a topology) shall cause much higher latency on nodes that handle way to many connection. So the final results is yes - it should lead to finding a geographically closest one, if it's not overcorrected. Theoretically it should not cause regional forks, unless the process become multithreaded.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from: