Won't each node simply connect to the most geographically closest nodes since latency is dependent on distance? Could this maybe lead to more regional forks instead of forks dependent on other factors?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Won't each node simply connect to the most geographically closest nodes since latency is dependent on distance? Could this maybe lead to more regional forks instead of forks dependent on other factors?
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.
um how do you figure that? first there are the seed nodes since gridcoin is NOT decentralized check /src/net.cpp around lines 113-118 now that Barton26 removed customminers BS 3 entries and left his single where he can do round robin with 1. Are you aware how BGP works and routing tables and peering? The Gridcoin client is not and connects where its told to connect or where you tell it to.. I thought up a certificate system when we were talking about paying for full nodes based upon how much of the network the node contributes to based upon connection count. I think it was an interview with peercoin we had on a hangout that I stole the idea from them if I remember correctly like node.gridcoin.us would delegate to the end user nodes that have connected to it and been confirmed on the right chain and then as if it was load balancing the Gridcoin wallet Grid/spider web of clients tells the wallet to connect to a specific node and i bet geo-ip location could be added in so you connect to the closest node with least latency to you vs say someone in Texas USA connecting to the UK or Asia when there is a node in Dallas. This would be a neat implementation then node.gridcoin.us is the only node that knows what other nodes are full nodes they could not get ddos'ed because the client connects to node.gridcoin.us says HAY I WANT TO BE A FULL NODE and it does checks and balances ( block hashes ) and then adds that node and its location to a master node list only node.gridcoin.us would know vs a wiki page.