This is the direction I would like to continue our conversation.
Yes and No. I have already stated that I would love to fix the software so that it can deal even with bad infrastrukture.
On the other end I don’t think we have to fix all of it. Let’s say the bad infrastructure also impacts the customer user experience. In that case we should set the right incentives. In fact I have a cheap onboard network card and I don’t know what it can handle. I am willing to plug in a better network adapter if that is needed. I don’t expect the software to solve all of my problems for me. Let’s meet somewhere in the middle. Fix the issues on the software side that we can fix but also accept that this will not help everyone.
Yea go for it. I do expect a different error ratio. You will see a lot of these errors again but thanks to the 5 retries graceful exit will still be successful. Graceful exit will fail if you have a higher then normal number of connection issues and yes they are connected to the host or to the host network. The storj network will give you a baseline of errors. If you end up with a higher error rate the question is why and the answer can’t be because of the storj network. The baseline of errors is the same for all of us.
I don’t think you have to proof anything. I appreciate your input even if it turns out that your proof might be wrong at the end. The data you have collected so far was already helpful for me. You don’t need to fight me / us. I would love to understand what is causing the higher rate of connetion issues. If we can find that out and maybe even implement a workaround that would be awesome.
That is rude? How it comes? Did I say something wrong that gives you the feeling that you have to strike back?