Order peers with the published algorithm

Keep zero weights first, use cumulative weights, select the first sum at least the draw, then remove that record.

• Priority comes first. Example Z/A/B are priority 10 with weights 0/1/3; C is priority 20 with weight 65535. C’s larger weight does not let it jump ahead of reachable priority-10 targets.
• The described ordering algorithm SHOULD be used in the absence of a protocol specifying other weighting information (Weight, page 4). Arrange the remaining records at one priority in any order, except put all zero-weight records first. The chosen stable example order is Z,A,B.
• Compute running sums: Z=0, A=1, B=4. Choose a uniform random integer from 0 through total 4 inclusive. Select the first running sum greater than or equal to the draw. A chosen draw of 3 selects B. Remove B, recompute over the remaining records, and repeat for every priority.
• Inclusive zero matters: with this chosen order, draw 0 selects Z, draw 1 selects A, and draws 2,3,4 select B. This is five equally likely draw values; zero weight is not an absolute prohibition. With only zero weights, total and draw are zero, so the first remaining record is chosen and then removed.
• Do not promise exact Weight/total traffic percentages. Official technical erratum 2984, proposing to change the algorithm, is Rejected. Erratum 8120 about the fictional example’s exact three-quarter claim is Held for Document Update, not a verified replacement rule. This guide preserves the published inclusive algorithm and avoids the misleading percentage claim. Verified editorial erratum 6600 fixes a spelling typo only.
• Removing each chosen record creates a retry order without replacement; it is not a command to connect to every server after success. Weight represents relatively static selection information, not a live server-load measurement (The Weight field, pages 5–6).