search for: edge_t

I want to use read.table to input many files, each for a different year. I would like to use the macro variable 't' to refer to the exact file that I would like to input the data using read.table. How could I do this? Thank you! for (t in 1970:2005) { edge <- read.table(file="edge_t.csv", header=T, sep=",") ## I will have many rows of code following the read.table line } -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/How-to-use-macro-variable-in-a-text-string-tp24615030p24615030.html Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

...lDiscovery). Granted, that would be an extremely weird situation (local communication suddenly stops working but non-local UDP hole punching is okay? seems unlikely) which we probably don't really care about. I am wondering if it would be cleaner to store the node's real UDP address in edge_t::address, and then if it gets updated, an ADD_EDGE message is automatically broadcast to inform the whole graph of the new address, updating the edge information in each node. This would solve the first two issues by switching from a "pull" model to a "push" model for propag...

...des, but this is probably an unsolvable problem anyway since we just don't have the necessary information to make them reach each other in this case, and broadcasts obviously won't get through a NAT. I guess the local socket information could be added to ADD_EDGE messages and stored in edge_t. Thoughts? [1] http://serverfault.com/questions/72112/how-to-alter-the-global-broadcast-address-255-255-255-255-behavior-on-windows (the long discussion in the comments of the second answer are particularly interesting) -- Etienne Dechamps

> If your question is "can I assign the same subnet to multiple tinc > nodes on the same network", the answer is yes (for both 1.0 and 1.1). Yes exactly. > currently it tries to estimate which one is closest by measuring the > time it took to establish metaconnections along the edges to the node, Shure? I remember alphabetic order (host name) in tinc 1.0. Is it the same

...wrote: >> currently it tries to estimate which one is closest by measuring the >> time it took to establish metaconnections along the edges to the node, > > Shure? I remember alphabetic order (host name) in tinc 1.0. Actually, yes you're right, my bad, I was confused between edge_t::weight and subnet_t::weight while looking at the code. The edge weight is only used when routing messages over the metagraph, not when sending packets. You are correct that node name lexicographical order is used as priority order as a last resort. However, you can add a weight to your Subnet con...

(Second try to send this. I wonder if the first one gotten eaten by a spam filter; I'll link to patches instead of attaching them.) Here are the tincctl patches I've been working on. They apply to http://www.tinc-vpn.org/svn/tinc/branches/1.1@1545. I intend to commit them once the crypto stuff's fixed. Since they're basically done, I'm emailing them now for review and in case

.../* Add flags (not encrypted) */ + + inpkt->len += sizeof(inpkt->flags); + /* Determine which socket we have to use */ for(sock = 0; sock < listen_sockets; sock++) @@ -574,29 +584,28 @@ static node_t *try_harder(const sockaddr_t *from, const vpn_packet_t *pkt) { avl_node_t *node; edge_t *e; - node_t *n = NULL; static time_t last_hard_try = 0; - for(node = edge_weight_tree->head; node; node = node->next) { + for (node = edge_weight_tree->head; node; node = node->next) { e = node->data; - if(sockaddrcmp_noport(from, &e->address)) { - if(last_hard_tr...

...if(c->node) c->node->connection = NULL; @@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ /* If the node is not reachable anymore but we remember it had an edge to us, clean it up */ - if(report && !c->node->status.reachable) { + if(report && !c->node->status.st.reachable) { edge_t *e; e = lookup_edge(c->node, myself); if(e) { @@ -239,17 +239,17 @@ c = node->data; if(c->last_ping_time + pingtimeout < now) { - if(c->status.active) { - if(c->status.pinged) { + if(c->status.st.active) { + if(c->status.st.pinged) { ifdebug(C...