Re: [Sks-devel] Optimum number of peers

[David Benfell]

On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 and before, Andy Ruddock and others wrote:

> > I suspect that avoiding the "thresholding phenomenon" isn't the right
> > basis for your reasoning. Nothing wrong with your reasoning
> > at all, all depends on what one chooses to optimize: in your
> > case you seem to want "robust global propagation" not "minimal necessary 
> > load"
> > as an optimization goal.

It seems to me that the point of a keyserver service is "robust
global propagation."  And to this end, I have to say, having a large
number of peers helps considerably when, much to my shame, I have
had to restore from dumps twice over the last couple of weeks.

In essence, my observation of my recon log leads me to believe that
spreading the load makes a rapid recovery possible and reduces the
load on everyone (except whomever I hit first--over 8,000 keys this
time, ouch).
> 
> Good guess, spot on. But although I'm not seeking to minimize the load
> on my servers they do perform other roles. I have to weigh up the
> resources which I'm able to allocate to each service which I wish to
> make available, and the fewer I have to allocate in order to achieve my
> goals the better.
> 
> >> For this reason I think I shall seek to peer with one or two peers in
> >> the North American continent, and one or two in Australia/New Zealand or
> >> Southern/Eastern Asia.
> >>
> >> If this is deemed to be suitable my membership details are :
> >>
> >> keyserver.rainydayz.org 11370      # Andy Ruddock
> >> <address@hidden> 0xEEC3AFB3

Seeing as I don't have your public key, I'm thinking it would be
nice to add you.  My server is physically located on a Linode in
Atlanta.  But I'll let you make that call.
> > 
> > For North American coverage, try peering here:
> >     keys.n3npq.net  11370
> > in a Tier IV data center with high availability and good bandwidth.
> > 
> > You are also welcome to peer with
> >     keys.rpm5.org   11370
> > which is an aging dual G5 on a (my) residence cable box.
> > 
Likewise, I'm assuming these offers weren't addressed to me, having
been down at the time that this was sent and not having previously
participated in this conversation.  But my philosophy remains, the
more the merrier.

cybernude.org 11370 #David Benfell <address@hidden> 0xFBEC617D
-- 
David Benfell <address@hidden>
http://www.parts-unknown.org/

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature