I noticed that when I am a leaf i quickly connect to an ultrapeer and everything seems great (except some searches return little or no results). I also notice that when I am an Ultrapeer I quickly have leafs connecting to me, but connecting to another ultrapeer seems to be a slow and painfull process. I usually have about 7 leafs connected for about 5 mins before I end up connecting to another ultrapeer. I think this is why the searches for leafs have little or no results returned. The ultrapeers are not connecting to each other quick enough. I think it would be best if I did NOT have ANY leafs connected to me before I am connected to another Ultrapeer. Just a thought I guess. Anyone else experience this sort of behaviour?.....(Maybe I just consumed too much alcohol tonight)

Yeah, I can confirm this behaviour.. Ultrapeer to ultrapeer connections are very rare...

When I forced myself to become an ultrapeer I was connecting to other ultrapeers with 20+ other ultrapeers inter-connected to them. I did have snapshots of an Ultrapeer with 300+ ultrapeers connected to him. I also had about 50+ Leaf nodes. But I was consuming too much bandwidth so I just switched back to becoming a Leaf. I think the problem with Ultrapeers now is they're not mainstream yet. You still have to realize LimeWire is the only client at the moment that has implemented the Ultrapeer technology. So whichs mean only like 5% (AT THE MOST) are either an ultrapeer or leaf even though ultrapeers do connected to 0.4 clients. But since the public release of 2.0 I'm starting to see more Ultrapeers with 2 or more other ultrapeers inter-connected to each. It'll just take time before ultrapeers will become in full effect on gnutella. I beleive BearShare is going to implement the Ultrapeer technology really soon so that will also help the situation out.

That is something I have NEVER seen. It's also weird that it's SO EASY to connect to an Ultrapeer as a leaf, yet SO DIFFICULT to connect to an Ultrapeer as another Ultrapeer. Logic dictates that something is not right. Also, from what I understand, you can't tell how many Ultrapeers a particular Ultrapeer is connected to because the Hosts value does not mean Ultrapeers.

Chris said they're working on the problem. Something about the TTL with leaves and ultrapeers. But as far as the number in the Hosts column when you're connected to an Ultrapeer, Adam says he thinks it is how many ultrapeers that are inter-connected to that ultrapeer. For some reason he wasnt 100% sure. I have a snapshot of me in leaf mode connected to an ultrapeer with 13 of other ultrapeers inter-connected to him.


http://24.37.161.8/images/01-01-02-12.43pm.jpg

you can see the date and time...

I also forgot to mention you can clearly see in the stats that it says 14 hosts, meaning, its counting the ultrapeer you're connected to and the other 13. As far as the horizon, I think its giving it for the ultrapeer you're connected to and of course the other 13. When I say horizon, I'm not talking about its also calculating all the Leaves that are connected to each individual ultrapeer as if it was one big sum. Its as if you were connected to 14 other hosts in "normal" mode as without being a leaf or ultrapeer.

I just connected about 10 minutes and I'm already connected to 29 other ultrapeers in my horizon. I'm starting to notice since the beta release of 1.9 (thats when ultrapeers were introduced) every week I connect to an ultrapeer that is connected to more ultrapeers then the previous week? The reason is b/c more ultrapeers are being introduced into the network. Its only been 2 weeks since the public release of ultrapeers (2.0.x). You must also remember what I said about LimeWire being the only client at the moment that has ultrapeer implementation in my earlier post on this thread. But as time passes we will see more and more ultrapeers inter-connected to each other and Gnutella becoming the ultimate P2P network to exist :]


snapshot

http://24.37.161.8/images/01-01-03-9.45pm.jpg