tag 'can-hop' peers to aid in connection closing logic

[whyrusleeping]

This should also probably tag relay peers with a higher value when they are actually relaying a connection for us. The logic there isnt simple, so i've punted on it for now.

[vyzo]

this will tag all connections to relays effectively, is that what we want?

[whyrusleeping]

@vyzo unsure, I think we want *at least* this. Connections to peers that will relay our connections are more valuable than otherwise. I think we also want to mark connections that are currently relaying for us as even more valuable, but tracking that seems tricky

…

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017, 9:47 AM vyzo ***@***.***> wrote: this will tag all connections to relays effectively, is that what we want? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#20 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABL4HG2ktZJ3woJadZyRdE0gurQTbGNSks5sqxMQgaJpZM4Pxxqv> .

[vyzo]

we should certainly tag connections that are actively relayed with high priority.
what does the value of 2 mean priority-wise?

[whyrusleeping]

They're somewhat arbitrary right now, I'm using 5 for dht kbucket peers.

…

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017, 10:03 AM vyzo ***@***.***> wrote: we should certainly tag connections that are actively relayed with high priority. what does the value of 2 mean priority-wise? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#20 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABL4HFDmh4OFO5cJmVLgYOzmfQ9YoJ0qks5sqxa4gaJpZM4Pxxqv> .