[Csci551-talk] Packet drops and freeloaders.

[Affan, Syed]

Hi Affan,
Suppose node 1 is a freeloader. He gets an INFO_REQ message from node 2.
He is not going to send a reply to this. In this case, does he consider
not sending this reply as a dropped packet ? 
>> No, although as sophia pointed out it would bebetter that we maintain
stats for refused packets.. But sicne the initial stats didn't mention
that, this is not required. Just log the INFO_REQ refused!

However, when node 1 sends his own INFO_REQ or SEG_REQ messages to other
nodes, he drops them probabilistically (and so will the receipients for
the INFO_REP and SEG_REP). Am i correct ? 
>>Yes

Thanks,

Regards.,
Rashmi.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Affan, Syed" <asyed at usc.edu>
Date: Monday, April 25, 2005 5:47 pm
Subject: RE: [Csci551-talk] Packet drops and freeloaders.

> I am not sure what you mean. We had specified that the sender of a 
> request decides according to its drop prob to drop a packet. And the 
> drop statistics were kept based on that, not at the receiver. The 
> receiver did not drop a pkt on reception. So Free loaders still have 
> to drop pkts that are outgoing. They refuse the pkts that they
> receive. I
> hope this is clear. 
> Thank you. 
> Best Regards,
> Affan, Syed. 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: csci551-talk-bounces at mailman.isi.edu
> [csci551-talk-bounces at mailman.isi.edu] On Behalf Of rashmi 
> chandrasekhar
> Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 4:27 PM
> To: csci551-talk at ISI.EDU
> Subject: [Csci551-talk] Packet drops and freeloaders.
> 
> 
> 
> Freeloaders drop Segment Request packets. Is this considered a
> drop at
> all ? I mean to say, its inherent for a freeloader to *ignore* any
> request packet. Also, I was of the opinion that packet drop statistics
> are only a result of the packet drop probability in the manager.conf.
> So, should the *REFUSED* packets also be added to the freeloader's
> dropped packets counter ?
> 
> This issue was raised some time back on the groups but I am not
> sure I
> understood the TA's response. Any help ?
> 
> -Rashmi.
> 
> 
> 
>