[Gzz-commits] storm/doc/pegboard/attacking_gisp--hemppah peg.rst

[Hermanni Hyytiälä]

CVSROOT:        /cvsroot/storm
Module name:    storm
Branch:         
Changes by:     Hermanni Hyytiälä <address@hidden>      03/06/13 09:12:32

Modified files:
        doc/pegboard/attacking_gisp--hemppah: peg.rst 

Log message:
        twid

CVSWeb URLs:
http://savannah.gnu.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/storm/storm/doc/pegboard/attacking_gisp--hemppah/peg.rst.diff?tr1=1.33&tr2=1.34&r1=text&r2=text

Patches:
Index: storm/doc/pegboard/attacking_gisp--hemppah/peg.rst
diff -u storm/doc/pegboard/attacking_gisp--hemppah/peg.rst:1.33 
storm/doc/pegboard/attacking_gisp--hemppah/peg.rst:1.34
--- storm/doc/pegboard/attacking_gisp--hemppah/peg.rst:1.33     Fri Jun 13 
08:42:12 2003
+++ storm/doc/pegboard/attacking_gisp--hemppah/peg.rst  Fri Jun 13 09:12:32 2003
@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@
 
 :Authors:  Hermanni Hyytiälä
 :Date-Created: 2003-06-05
-:Last-Modified: $Date: 2003/06/13 12:42:12 $
-:Revision: $Revision: 1.33 $
+:Last-Modified: $Date: 2003/06/13 13:12:32 $
+:Revision: $Revision: 1.34 $
 :Status:   Incomplete
 
 .. :Stakeholders:
@@ -237,9 +237,9 @@
   to maintain hostile peers in their routing tables while still hostile
   peers are able to cause problems to the network's operation. "SEEN", "RESULT"
   and "QUERY" messages are part of GISP-3.4 specification. Also, 
-  a hostile peer is able to use this "dumb" behaviour with other GISP-3.4 
-  messages.
-  
+  a hostile peer is able to use this "dumb" behaviour with the other messages
+  of GISP-3.4 specification. 
+    
 - In the GISP overlay, the average routing hop length is proportional to 
   O(log n).
   
@@ -248,22 +248,15 @@
   probability of routing successfully "QUERY" message between two regular 
   peers is (1-f)^h-1, where h is the routing hops used in the overlay. 
 
-
   
+    
 - - -
 
 - It is expected that (popular) data items can be found with fewer hops in 
   *some cases* in GISP network w.r.t Chord network, since GISP extends Chord's 
   routing table to have more information as a cache
   
-.. more specific, what effects cache has, formula ?
-
-  
-- GISP's lookup failure rate increases linearly with the fraction of "dumb" 
-  peers. More specifically, fraction f of lookups fail after a randomly 
-  selected fraction of f peers become "dumb" in a static network
-  
-.. make "dumb"
+.. more specific, what effects cache has, distributions, formula ?
   
 - It is expected that fraction f of all network traffic k is "lost" in 
   a static GISP network and therefore may have negative influence to network's
@@ -276,6 +269,12 @@
 If fraction f of the peers are dumb in a static network with 10 - 10000
   peer and fraction f of the lookups, then fraction of the lookups will 
   fail at all network sizes
+  
+- GISP's lookup failure rate increases linearly in a static network with the 
+  fraction of "dumb" peers when a "dumb" peer do not provide a "RESULT" 
+  message for a "QUERY" message. More specifically, when randomly selected 
+  fraction of f all peers become "dumb", same fraction f of all lookups will 
+  fail.  
 
   
 .. No, you should not say "expect similar" - it's far too vague.