reference will now be made in detail to the preferred embodiments of the present invention , examples of which are illustrated in the accompanying drawings . the invention is described below with reference to block diagrams and operational illustrations of methods and devices for distributing content data over a computer network . it is understood that each block of the block diagrams or operational illustrations , and combinations of blocks in the block diagrams or operational illustrations , may be implemented by means of analog or digital hardware and computer program instructions . these computer program instructions may be provided to a processor of a general purpose computer , special purpose computer , asic , or other programmable data processing apparatus , such that the instructions , which execute via the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing apparatus , implements the functions / acts specified in the block diagrams or operational block or blocks . in some alternate implementations , the functions / acts noted in the blocks may occur out of the order noted in the operational illustrations . for example , two blocks shown in succession may in fact be executed substantially concurrently or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverse order , depending upon the functionality / acts involved . in the system and method of u . s . pat . no . 7 , 035 , 933 there were essentially two kinds of nodes : repeat capable nodes and non - repeat capable nodes . a node was deemed “ repeat capable ” if it possessed the upstream bandwidth capacity to support two outgoing audio / video streams plus some pre - defined additional capacity for overhead and margin . if a node did not have the capacity to support two children it was deemed non - repeat capable . as pointed out above , this bifurcation of nodes was somewhat wasteful in that nodes fully capable of supporting a single child were not utilized by the system due to the inability of the reconfiguration algorithms to accommodate nodes capable of supporting only a single child . in the present system and method there are three main types of nodes : type 2 nodes , type 1 nodes , and type 0 nodes . as their names imply , type 2 nodes are capable of supporting two children , type 1 nodes are capable of supporting a single child , and type 0 nodes are incapable of supporting any children . in addition to these three major types , within a type various priorities may exist . the defined priorities are high , normal , and low . each of these priorities does not necessarily exist for each of the types . the type and priority of a node together define that node &# 39 ; s preference level . the defined preference levels for nodes are as follows : type 2 , normal priority ( sometimes written as t2n ) is the highest priority node known to the system . these nodes are capable of supporting two children and are roughly equivalent to “ repeat capable ” nodes in the previous system and method . type 1 , high priority ( sometimes written as t1h ) are capable of supporting a single child . at some point in their past t1h nodes were categorized as type 2 , but were later “ demoted ” to type 1 — generally as a result of poor performance when serving as the parent of two children . type 1 high priority are given preference over other type 1 nodes in order to keep the type 1 high priority nodes as high in the tree as possible ( just below the type 2 ). this is due to the fact that we expect these nodes to be “ stronger ” than normal type 1 &# 39 ; s and also so that if a type 1 high priority converts back to a type 2 normal node it will already be situated “ near ” the type 2 nodes . type 1 normal priority is the third preference level of node that the system recognizes nodes whose upstream bandwidth tested capable of supporting one child but not two are given this rating when they join the network . type 0 high priority is the fourth preference level of node that the system recognizes . these nodes are currently judged incapable of repeating to even a single child , however they were at one time type 1 . type 0 high priority are given preference over type 0 normal and type 0 low as they have a history of having been a productive node and therefore should be retained in the tree as much as possible in case they reconvert to type 1 status again . type 0 normal priority is the fifth preference level of node that the system recognizes . the only type of node a type 0 normal can theoretically bump is a type 0 low priority . type 0 normal priority nodes correspond to the “ non - repeat capable ” nodes from the previous system and method . nodes whose upstream bandwidth test too low to act as a repeater of even a single stream when the node joins the network are given this designation . type 0 low priority nodes are the sixth and lowest preference level of node recognized by the system . these nodes are incapable of bumping nodes of any type . a type 0 node may be assigned “ low priority ” status for a number of reasons , such as an inability to reliably receive data from its parent node . the fundamental rule concerning node type is that a node of a particular preference level may not bump a node at an equal or greater preference level , but may always bump a node at a lesser preference level . ( the one exception to this rule is that type 2 normal nodes may cause other type 2 normal nodes to be bumped when executing priority and system joins , as explained below .) thus , except as stipulated in the previous paragraph , type 2 normal nodes may bump all nodes except other type 2 normal nodes . a type 1 high priority may not bump type 2 normal or other type 1 high priority nodes , but may bump type 1 normal priority , type 0 high priority , type 0 normal priority , and type 0 low priority . likewise , type 1 normal priority nodes cannot bump type 2 normal , type 1 high , or other type 1 normal priority nodes , but are free to bump all type 0 nodes regardless of their “ priority ”. similarly , type 0 high priority nodes cannot bump type 2 , type 1 , or other type 0 high priority nodes , but can bump type 0 normal and type 0 low priority nodes . type 0 normal can only bump type 0 low , and type 0 low can bump no one . introduction of dynamic vtt and definition of primary and secondary sides of the broadcast tree fig1 illustrates a complete distributed broadcast tree constructed according to the methods of the present system and method . an innovation present in this system and method over that of u . s . pat . no . 7 , 035 , 933 is the ability to form and maintain linear chains of nodes composed of nodes that are capable of broadcasting to only one child . these linear chains may be capped by nodes that are incapable of broadcasting to any nodes another innovation present in this system and method is the demarcation of one side of the binary tree as “ primary ” and the other side as “ secondary ”. the primary side of the tree , shown as the left , or green , side of the tree in fig1 , is where the system prefers to place nodes . the secondary side of the tree , shown as the right , or red , side of the tree in fig1 is used to temporarily hold excess linear chains that cannot be accommodated in the primary side of the tree . a difference between the primary and secondary sides of the tree is that the capacity of the secondary side can be increased on an as - needed basis by the addition of vtt ( virtual tree top ) nodes . vtt nodes are “ virtual ” nodes introduced into the binary tree to expand the “ capacity ” of the tree . vtt nodes map in the physical world to additional connections to the server . hence , while a classical binary tree can only have two nodes connected directly to the root node / physical server , the use of vtt nodes allow for an arbitrary number of physical connections to the server . while vtt nodes have been described in previous applications related to u . s . pat . no . 7 , 035 , 933 , we extend their use to being generated dynamically based on the number and type of nodes present in a broadcast network . previous applications related to u . s . pat . no . 7 , 035 , 933 include u . s . patent application ser . nos . 11 / 176 , 956 , 11 / 179 , 041 , 11 / 179 , 063 , 11 / 408 , 169 , and 11 / 746 , 494 , which are incorporated herein by reference . an important use of the secondary side of the tree and use of dynamic vtt is to prevent individual linear chains from growing exceedingly long leading to an unbalanced tree . as described elsewhere in this document , it is frequently desirable in the present system and method to merge linear chains of type 1 nodes . if left unchecked , networks with few type 2 nodes and many type 1 nodes could devolve into a small number of very long chains . long chains should be avoided as they lead to propagation delays . additionally , large numbers of repeaters between an individual node ( such as an edge node or node near the edge of the tree ) and the server increase the likelihood of quality of service issues — since the “ signal ” is passing through a large number of “ repeaters ” each given to failure . to limit the length of type 1 chains in networks with few type 2 repeaters , we define the concept of “ long ”. long , which may be a dynamic definition that is dependent on the total number of nodes , the total number of a particular type of node , the percentage of certain node types , ratios of the various node types , or other dynamic features of the network , is used to limit the total length of type 1 chains . whenever a merger of two linear chains is to be performed , if the length of the chain resulting from the merger were to exceed “ long ” the merge will not be performed and instead one of the linear chains would be moved to the secondary side of the tree . to prevent the secondary side of the tree from becoming saturated , additional vtt nodes are created as necessary to act as docking locations for additional linear type 1 chains . however , a maximum saturation point may be defined which specifies the maximum number of vtt nodes allowable on the secondary side of the tree . whenever a node with children leaves the broadcast network ( or tree ), the reconfiguration algorithms decide where to place the children of the departing node as well any node chains associated with those children . there are two basic types of ways in which a node may leave the broadcast network ( or tree ): graceful departs , and unexpected or non - graceful departs . the term “ graceful depart ” refers to a normal or procedural shutdown of the client application — the type of departure that is generated when the end - user clicks on the “ x ” in the upper right hand corner of the client interface in order to exit the application . when a graceful depart is initiated , all shutdown procedures are then completed . the departing node sends a depart message to its children and parent with instructions on how they are to proceed . the children of the departing node send out depart propagate packets to their children . these packets are updated at each level and propagated throughout the sub - trees . the term “ unexpected or non - graceful depart ” refers to a node leaving the system in an unexpected manner — without the normal shutdown procedures being performed . a non - graceful depart can occur for any number of reasons : the computer that is running the client application may lose its internet connection , or the machine running the client application may crash , or the end - user abnormally terminates the client application by “ killing ” it with task manager , etc . generally , when an unexpected depart occurs , the children of the departing node will climb to their grandparent for instructions on how to proceed . in addition to nodes leaving the network altogether by way of graceful and non - graceful departs , a node that remains in the network ( tree ) can change its position by disconnecting from its current parent and reconnecting to some other parent . these reconnections can be voluntary or involuntary in response to changing conditions in the network . one type of reconfiguration event is a “ bump ”. the term “ bump ” refers to a node being forcibly kicked by its parent so that the parent can accept a higher priority node in the bumped node &# 39 ; s place . when the parent kicks the bumped node , it also tells the bumped node where to go next . a “ priority join ” is a way to force reconfiguration . when a node registers with the priority join flag set , the node that it registers to kicks its red child and accepts the registering node as its new red child . priority joins are only allowed for type 2 nodes . a “ system join ” is a way to force a priority join in a non - graceful reconfiguration . a system join is triggered when a type 2 node with children registers with a node that cannot accept it as a child . during a system join , the joining node is told to priority join to the red child of the node with which it is trying to register . two additional terms that are frequently used when discussing reconfiguration are : the “ recommended parent list ” and the “ network topology model ” or ntm . a node &# 39 ; s recommended parent list is a list of all nodes known to that node that can act as parent nodes . the recommended parent list will vary from node to node as an individual node can only recommend parents that are within its own sub - tree . the recommended parent list is usually sorted ( or organized in some way ) so as to make finding the “ best ” recommended parent easy to accomplish . the “ best ” recommended parent will generally be the recommended parent that is closest to the server ( the root of the broadcast tree ). the network topology model ( or ntm ) is a node &# 39 ; s internal model of the structure of the portion of the network of which the node is aware . a node &# 39 ; s ntm generally consists of a path from the root / server node down to the node in question , together with the sub - tree of the overall network tree that is rooted at the node . network topology models are generally annotated with state information about the nodes contained in the model , such as the recommended parent lists of all nodes in the sub - tree . a node uses its ntm to determine where to place incoming nodes that attempt to connect to the node in question . merging is the process of combining two chains of type 1 nodes where each chain may or may not be capped with a type 0 node . when a node directly supporting two node chains departs the network , either gracefully or non - gracefully , its two chains may be merged as long as their combined length does not exceed the pre - defined value for “ long ”. fig2 illustrates the node chain merger process . initially node 2 is the parent of two type 1 nodes , node 4 , a type 1 high priority , is the green child of the departing node and node 5 , also a type 1 high priority , is the red child of the departing node . node 4 is the root of a chain of type 1 nodes ( node 4 , node 8 , and node 12 ) capped by a type 0 node , node 14 . similarly , node 5 is the root of a type 1 chain ( node 5 and node 9 ) capped by a type 0 node , node 13 . 1 ) node 2 leaves the tree . it sends out the depart packet with reconfiguration instruction . 3 ) node 5 connects to node 4 and bumps node 8 . node 4 tells node 8 to go to node 5 where 4 kicks 8 . 4 ) node 8 connects to node 5 and 5 tells 8 to go to node 9 and bump node 13 . node 9 tells node 13 to connect to 8 . 5 ) node 8 tells node 13 that 8 can &# 39 ; t place 13 so 13 climbs to the first 2 in 13 s path and continues to the server until 13 is placed . the two chains are now completely merge . node 2 departs the network leaving behind the two node chains . as node 4 is the green child of the departing node it will be instructed to connect to its former grandparent , node 1 . node 5 will be instructed to connect into the chain rooted by node 4 immediately below the lowest type 1 high priority node . since there is only one type 1 high priority node in the chain rooted at node 4 , node 5 will connect to that node , which happens to be node 4 . in order to accept node 5 , node 4 was forced to bump its type 1 normal child , node 8 . during the bump of node 8 by node 4 , node 4 will have instructed node 8 to connect to node 5 for further instructions . since node 8 is type 1 normal it cannot become a child of node 5 , instead node 5 instructs node 8 to connect as a child of node 9 . node 8 connects to node 9 , causing node 13 a type 0 low priority node to be bumped . node 13 then attempts to connect to node 8 , but since node 13 is type 0 low which is incapable of bumping anyone and the chain headed by node 8 terminates in a type 0 high ( node 14 ), node 13 is rejected and must climb its path , beginning at the first type 2 node and working upwards towards the root server until it can either be placed or rejected completely from this broadcast tree . thus the two linear chains have now been completely merged into a single chain , with the level of nodes respected — type 1 high priority nodes situated above type 1 normal priority nodes and type 0 high priority retained in preference to type 0 normal or low priority . whenever a departing node completes its shutdown procedure , it sends a depart message to its children and parent . the green child of the departing node is instructed to connect to the parent of the departing node . if there is a red child , a decision has to be made as to what to do with this red child based upon the type of the red child . if the red child is a type 2 , the departing node may tell the red child to priority join to its sibling . if the child is a type 1 or a type 0 , then the departing node sends the red child a connection path based on the recommended parent list of its green sibling . if there is no place for the type 1 or type 0 red child to be placed in the green child &# 39 ; s sub - tree , then the departing node will tell the type 1 or type 0 red child to climb its path . fig3 through fig1 illustrate the expected reconfiguration behavior resulting from nodes departing the network in a graceful manner . in fig3 , the end - user whose client application is identified as node 2 clicks the “ x ” in the upper right hand corner of the client or otherwise instructs the application to exit . as part of its close out procedure , node 2 constructs depart messages which contain information instructing the nodes surrounding node 2 what actions they are to take . node 3 receives a message from node 2 instructing it to connect to its former grandparent , node 1 . node 1 receives a message from node 2 instructing it to expect node 3 to connect to it as a replacement for node 2 . node 4 receives a message from node 2 containing instructions as to where it should connect as described above . depending on the type and number of children node 3 already supports as well as the type of node 4 , node 4 may connect directly as a child of node 3 , somewhere in the sub - tree rooted at node 3 , elsewhere in the network , or even under rare circumstances be rejected completely if there is no available location to which it can dock . 1 . user clicks x or file / close on node 2 . node 2 constructs the depart packet which contains information telling each node what actions to take . it will tell node 3 to connect to its ( node 2 &# 39 ; s ) parent which is node 1 . it will tell node 4 where to go based on the recommended parent list for node 3 . it constructs a path for node 4 and places it in the depart packet . this path would [ node 3 , node 1 , . . . ]. 2 . node 2 sends the depart packet to its children and its parent . this packet tells its recipients the id of the parent , green child , red child of the departing node . each node then compares its id with the id &# 39 ; s of the parent , green child and red child to determine its relationship with the departing node . each node then takes the action corresponding to its relationship with the departing node . 3 . node 3 constructs and sends the depart propagate packet to its children . this packet is propagated to node 3 &# 39 ; s subtree . the depart propagate packet is altered at each level and customized for the particular node &# 39 ; s children . in other words , upon receipt of the depart propagate packet , each node modifies the packet based on what its children should do and sends it if it deems sending is necessary . the purpose of the depart propagate packet is to reconfigure the subtree of the departing node . each t2 child of the departing node may construct and send a depart propagate packet based on its subtree . fig4 illustrates the case in which both children ( node 3 and node 4 ) of the departing node , node 2 , are type 2 . in this case node 3 is instructed to connect to node 1 and node 4 is instructed to connect to node 3 . this type of reconfiguration is similar to standard reconfiguration in the u . s . pat . no . 7 , 035 , 933 . 1 . node 2 gracefully departs . node 2 sends the depart packet to its parent its children . node 3 is told to climb to node 1 and node 4 is told to cross connect to node 3 . 2 . node 3 climbs to node 1 and node 4 cross connects to node 3 . fig5 illustrates the case in which the preferred ( green ) child ( node 3 ) of the departing node is type 2 , while the non - preferred ( red ) child ( node 4 ) of the departing node is type 1 . in this case , node 3 will connect to its former grandparent node 1 , while node 4 will be instructed to connect to a node in node 3 &# 39 ; s sub - tree based on node 3 &# 39 ; s recommended parent list . 1 . node 2 gracefully departs . node 2 sends the depart packet to its parent and its children . node 3 is told to climb to node 1 and node 4 is placed by node 2 in node 3 &# 39 ; s subtree based on node 3 &# 39 ; s recommended parent list . 2 . node 3 climbs to node 1 and node 4 connects to its recommended parent which is 3 in this case . fig6 illustrates the case in which both children of the departing node are type 1 nodes . in this case , node 3 will connect to node 1 and node 4 will be instructed to connect to a node in node 3 &# 39 ; s sub - tree based on node 3 &# 39 ; s recommended parent list . note that if node 3 and node 4 were the heads of linear chains , a chain merger would occur using the method illustrated in fig2 and described above . 1 . node 2 gracefully departs . node 2 sends the depart packet to its parent and its children . node 3 is told to climb to node 1 and node 4 is placed by node 2 in node 3 &# 39 ; s subtree based on nodes 3 &# 39 ; s recommended parent list . 2 . node 3 climbs to node 1 and node 4 connects to its recommended parent which is 3 in this case . note that if 4 and 3 were dragging chains , a chain reconfiguration would occur such as is described in fig2 . fig7 illustrates the case in which node 3 , the green child of departing node 2 is type 1 while the red child of the departing node ( node 4 ) is type 0 . node 3 is instructed to connect to node 1 and node 4 will be instructed to connect to a node in node 3 &# 39 ; s sub - tree based on node 3 &# 39 ; s recommended parent list . 1 . node 2 gracefully departs . node 2 sends the depart packet to its parent and its children . node 3 is told to climb to node 1 and node 4 is placed by node 2 in node 3 &# 39 ; s subtree based on nodes 3 &# 39 ; s recommended parent list . 2 . node 3 climbs to node 1 and node 4 connects to its recommended parent which is 3 in this case . fig8 illustrates the case in which both children of departing node 2 are of type 0 . the green child , node 3 , is instructed to connect to node 1 . however the red child , node 4 , must climb its path looking for a home . it first connects to node 1 and if node 1 cannot place it , will climb to higher levels of the tree until it reaches the server . if the server cannot place node 4 it will be rejected from the broadcast tree . 1 . node 2 gracefully departs . node 2 sends the depart packet to its parent and its children . node 3 is told to climb to node 1 and node 4 is told to climb its path . 2 . node 3 climbs to node 1 and node 4 climbs its path . fig9 illustrates the case where node 3 , the green child of departing node 2 , is of type 2 ; while node 4 , the red child of the departing node , is of type 0 . in this case , node 3 will be instructed by node 2 &# 39 ; s depart message to connect to node 1 . node 1 will expect node 3 based on its own message from node 2 . node 4 will be directed to connect to a location in node 3 &# 39 ; s sub - tree ( assuming a location is available for a type 0 to dock ) based on node 3 &# 39 ; s recommended parent list . 1 . node 2 gracefully departs . node 2 sends the depart packet to its parent and its children . node 3 is told to climb to node 1 and node 4 is placed by node 2 in node 3 &# 39 ; s subtree based on nodes 3 &# 39 ; s recommended parent list . 2 . node 3 climbs to node 1 and node 4 connects to its new parent which is 3 in this case . fig1 illustrates a graceful depart of a type 1 node . node 2 , a type 1 node , executes a graceful client shutdown . as a result node 2 transmits depart messages to its parent , node 1 , and its child , node 3 . node 2 &# 39 ; s depart message instructs node 3 to connect to its former grandparent , node 1 . 1 . node 2 is shutdown gracefully . node 2 sends out the depart packets . 2 . node 3 connects to node 2 &# 39 ; s old parent which is his grandparent , node 1 . when an unexpected or non - graceful depart occurs , such as happens when a node loses its connection to its parent , the children of the departing node will climb their path to their former grandparent for placement . the first child that registers with its former grandparent is accepted . the second child that registers with its grandparent will take different actions based on its type . if the slower child is a type 2 and has children , that node will do a system join to its grandparent . the grandparent will instruct the joining node to priority join to the grandparent &# 39 ; s red child . otherwise , the second child will follow the normal registration procedure . if the second child is a type 1 or type 0 , the grandparent places it as if it were just entering the network . the node may not priority join , as priority join functionality is reserved only for type 2 nodes . type 1 and type 0 nodes must register normally at all times . the reason behind this restriction is to prevent type 1 nodes from bumping type 2 nodes or higher priority type 1 nodes . since nodes that priority join are automatically accepted as a node &# 39 ; s red child and that red child is bumped , type 1 nodes could bump type 2 nodes if they were allowed to priority join . since this would work counter to the notion of placing higher level nodes closer to the server , only type 2 nodes are allowed to priority join . fig1 through fig1 illustrate the reconfiguration behaviors resulting from nodes departing the network in an unexpected ( non - graceful ) manner . fig1 illustrates the general method for handling unexpected or non - graceful node departures . node 2 , the parent of two nodes , node 3 and node 4 , and the child of node 1 , departs the network in an unexpected and non - graceful manner . since no depart messages were generated and sent by node 2 prior to its departure , node 3 and node 4 simply lose their connections to node 2 . as each of these nodes become aware that node 2 no longer exists in the network , via connection time outs or some other means , they will climb to their former grandparent , node 1 . the node that reaches node 1 first will be connected to node 1 as its child , replacing the departed node 2 . the slower of the two nodes will be dealt with as described above . 1 . node 2 is shutdown non - gracefully ( e . g . client loses internet ). 2 . node 3 and 4 lose connection to node 2 . thus , they climb their path to node 1 . 3 . node 1 places them in the order in which they arrive . image ( 3 ) shows one possible outcome . fig1 illustrates the case where both children of the unexpectedly departing node are type 2 . 1 . node 2 non - gracefully departs . node 3 and node 4 detect that their parent has departed . both climb their path to their grandparent ( node 1 ). 2 . node 1 places nodes 3 and 4 based on its recommended parent list . they will end up in different places depending on who registers with node 1 first . image ( 2 ) shows one possible scenario . fig1 illustrates the case where the green child of the unexpectedly departing node is type 2 and the red child is type 1 . 1 . node 2 non - gracefully departs . nodes 3 and 4 detect that their parent has departed . 2 . nodes 3 and 4 climb their path to their grandparent ( node 1 ). node 1 places nodes 3 and 4 based on its recommended parent list . they will end up in different places depending on who gets to node 1 first . image ( 2 ) shows one possible scenario . fig1 illustrates the case where both children of the departing node are type 1 . 1 . node 2 non - gracefully departs . nodes 3 and 4 detect that their parent has departed . 2 . nodes 3 and 4 climb their path to their grandparent ( node 1 ). node 1 places nodes 3 and 4 based on its recommended parent list . they will end up in different places depending on who gets to node 1 first . image ( 2 ) shows one possible scenario . fig1 illustrates the case where the green child is type 1 and the red child is type 0 . 1 . node 2 non - gracefully departs . nodes 3 and 4 detect that their parent has departed . 2 . nodes 3 and 4 climb their path to their grandparent ( node 1 ). node 1 places nodes 3 and 4 based on its recommended parent list . they will end up in different places depending on who gets to node 1 first . image ( 2 ) shows one possible scenario . fig1 illustrates the case where both child nodes of the departing node are type 0 . 1 . node 2 non - gracefully departs . nodes 3 and 4 detect that their parent has departed . 2 . nodes 3 and 4 climb their path to their grandparent ( node 1 ). node 1 places nodes 3 and 4 based on its recommended parent list . they will end up in different places depending on who gets to node 1 first . image ( 2 ) shows one possible scenario . fig1 illustrates the case where the green child is type 2 and the red child is type 0 . 1 . node 2 non - gracefully departs . nodes 3 and 4 detect that their parent has departed . 2 . nodes 3 and 4 climb their path to their grandparent ( node 1 ). node 1 places nodes 3 and 4 based on its recommended parent list . they will end up in different places depending on who gets to node 1 first . image ( 2 ) shows one possible scenario . fig1 illustrates a unexpected ( non - graceful ) depart of a type 1 node . node 2 , a type 1 node , departs unexpectedly from the network in a non - graceful manner . node 3 becomes aware of the departure of node 2 via the connection between the two nodes timing out or by some other means . node 3 climbs its path to its former grandparent node 1 and node 1 accepts node 3 as its child . 1 . node 2 is shutdown non - gracefully . node 3 times out on it connection to node 2 . node 3 climbs its path to his grandparent , node 1 . when a client is shutdown gracefully , it sends out the depart messages to each of its kids and its parent . however , there is no guarantee that these messages will be received by their intended recipients . fig1 through fig2 illustrate the consequences of the failure of various messages to reach their intended recipients . fig1 illustrates the case in which the depart message fails to reach the non - preferred ( red ) child . 2 . node 2 sends out the depart packets but node 4 fails to receive it . 3 . node 3 connects to node 1 correctly . node 4 waits until its connection to node 2 times out and then climbs its path to node 1 . 4 . node 1 places node 4 in its sub tree if it can . if it can &# 39 ; t place node 4 , it rejects node 4 . image ( 4 ) shows one possible outcome . fig2 illustrates the case in which the depart message fails to reach the preferred ( green ) child . 2 . node 2 sends out the depart packets but node 3 fails to receive it . 3 . node 4 connects to the first node in the path it was given in the depart packet from node 2 , which is node 3 . nodes 3 &# 39 ; s connection to node 2 times out and it climbs its path to node 1 . 4 . node 1 places node 3 in its sub tree if it can . if it can &# 39 ; t place node 3 , it rejects node 3 and node 3 climbs its path , dragging node 4 with it . node 1 should be able to accept node 3 as it should have an open slot . image ( 4 ) shows one possible outcome . fig2 illustrates the case in which the depart message fails to reach the parent . 2 . node 2 send out the depart packets , but node 1 fails to receive it . 3 . node 4 connects to the first node in the path in the depart packet it was given by node 2 , i . e . node 3 . nodes 3 connects to node 1 . node 1 clears node 3 from its ntm . if node 1 &# 39 ; s connection to node 2 has timed out , it will place node 3 in its subtree correctly . if node 1 &# 39 ; s connection to node 2 has been timed out , it will place node 3 based on its subtree which contains a node that has already left the network . in this case , it will send node 3 to node 2 . this connection will fail . node 3 will then climb to node 1 &# 39 ; s parent for placement . fig2 illustrates the case in which the depart messages fail to reach both children . 2 . node 2 sends out the depart packets but nodes 3 and 4 fail to receive it . 3 . nodes 3 and 4 timeout on their connections to node 2 and climb to their grandparent , node 1 , for placement . node 1 has been told by node 2 &# 39 ; s depart packet that it should expect node 3 to connect to it . thus , node 1 will wait for a certain window for node 3 to connect . if this window has not expired , regardless of which node arrives first , node 3 will be accepted and node 4 will be placed normally because node 1 has reconfigured its internal network technology model based on the assumed acceptance of node 3 . note that if this window expires , all registers are treated normally . fig2 illustrates the case in which the depart message fails to reach both the parent and the non - preferred ( red ) child . 2 . node 2 sends out the depart packets but nodes 1 and 4 fail to receive it . 3 . node 3 connects to node 1 . node 1 is not expecting node 3 . when node 1 gets the register from node 3 it will remove node 3 and its sub tree from its ntm . it will place node 3 . if node 1 has timed out on it connection to node 2 , node 2 will not be in node 1 &# 39 ; s ntm nor its rp_list . thus , node 3 will be placed correctly . if node 1 has not timed out on its connection to node 2 , then node 3 may be sent to node 2 . this connection would fail and node 3 would climb to node 1 &# 39 ; s parent for placement . node 4 would timeout on its connection to node 2 and would climb to its grandparent , node 1 , for placement . node 1 is not expecting node 4 . node 1 removes node 4 and its sub tree from its ntm and places node 4 based on its updated ntm . fig2 illustrates the case in which the depart message fails to reach both the parent and the preferred ( green ) child . 2 . node 2 sends out the depart packets but nodes 1 and 3 fail to receive it . 3 . node 4 connects to the first node in the path given by node 2 in the depart packet which , in this case , is node 3 . node 3 will receive the register from node 4 and place it normally . node 3 will time out on its connection to node 2 and climb its path to its grandparent , node 1 , for placement . node 1 will not be expecting node 3 . node 1 will remove node 3 and its sub tree from its ntm . it will then place node 3 . fig2 illustrates the case in which all three messages fail to reach their intended recipients . in this case the graceful depart reverts to the standard non - graceful depart described above . 2 . node 2 sends out the depart packets but nodes 1 , 3 and 4 fail to receive it . 3 . if all three nodes fail to receive the depart packet , the depart becomes non - graceful and acts accordingly . when node a sends a message to node b requesting that node a be placed in the broadcast tree , it is necessary that node b have access to an internal network topology model ( ntm ) that reflects the overall state of the network with enough fidelity to assign node a to a parent node consistent with maintaining the key properties of the network , such as maintaining approximate tree balance and placing stronger nodes as high in the tree ( as close to the server ) as practical . this ntm must be maintained even during times of high turnover when nodes are frequently joining and departing the network . to that end , the parent of a departing node must be able to effectively predict the likely effect on the overall topology of the network its departing child will have . in other words , the parent node must update its internal ntm to account for connections that will likely be broken and new connections that will likely be formed as a result of the departure of its child from the network . these effects are not necessarily localized and may propagate throughout the sub - tree rooted at the parent all the way to the edge of the network . in the system and method of u . s . pat . no . 7 , 035 , 933 reconfigurations to a node &# 39 ; s local copy of the ntm for the parent of a departing node involved recursively following the green path of the parent &# 39 ; s sub - tree and having red children connect to their green siblings . this elegant approach emerged from the system requirement that all nodes could either repeat to two children or not at all — and that , aside from greenness / redness , all repeaters were essentially equal . thus , a red child ( node c ) was assumed able to connect to its green sibling ( node b ), and the green child ( node b ) was assumed able to accept its red sibling ( node c ) as a child , provided the green child ( node b ) did not already have two children of its own ( node d and node e ) or if it ( node b ) did it ( node b ) would be required to bump its existing red child ( either node d or node e ) making room for its ( node b &# 39 ; s ) incoming red sibling ( node c ). in cases where the red sibling was not capable of repeating to two children and the red child of the green sibling was also a not capable of repeating to two children , reconfigurations were allowed to continue as described above with the understanding that the green sibling in reality would simply reject the connection request from the red sibling as a non - repeat capable node was not allowed to bump another non repeat capable node . the difference between the outcomes of the ntm reconfiguration and the reality of the network - level request logic was allowed to persist , because the difference did not affect the structure of the ntm as far as placement of new nodes was concerned . with the complexity of the new placement logic for the present system and method , reconfiguration must solve issues that didn &# 39 ; t exist before . in the present system and method , all repeat capable nodes are not essentially equal as they were in u . s . pat . no . 7 , 035 , 933 . some repeat capable nodes can support two children ( type 2 nodes ) while other repeat capable nodes can support only one child ( type 1 nodes ). of the repeat capable nodes that can only support one child , there is the additional consideration of its priority . a type 1 node of normal priority ( e . g ., a t1n ) cannot be the parent of a type 1 of a higher priority ( e . g ., a t1h ), and no type 1 node , regardless of its priority , may become the parent of a type 2 node . consider the situation illustrated in fig2 . node b is departing the network in a graceful manner . the parent of node b , node a , needs to update its internal network topology model to account for the reconfigurations that are likely to occur as a result of node b &# 39 ; s departure . in one embodiment , the method of u . s . pat . no . 7 , 035 , 933 would be : ( 1 ) the green child of the departing node connects to its former grandparent , in this particular case node c connects to node a , ( 2 ) the red child of the departing node cross connects to its green sibling , in this particular case node d cross connects to node c , ( 3 ) the green child bumps its own red child to make room for its incoming red sibling , in this particular case node c bumps node f to accept node d , ( 4 ) the bumped red grandchild of the departing node cross connects to its own green sibling , in this particular case node f would cross connect to node e , ( 5 ) the green - green grandchild of the departing node would bump its own red child to make room for its incoming red sibling , in this particular case node e bumps node j to accept node f , and finally ( 6 ) the bumped red great grandchild of the departing node cross connects to its own green sibling , in this case node j cross connects to node i . the problem with the method of u . s . pat . no . 7 , 035 , 933 is that it does not account for the fact that node f cannot connect to node e since node f is a type 1 node and both of node e &# 39 ; s children are type 2 . in the system of the present system and method type 1 nodes cannot bump type 2 nodes . thus the present system and method includes the following method that allows higher level nodes ( such as node a ) to predict the reconfiguration behavior of lower level nodes ( such as node e ) in order for the higher level node to update its internal network topology model to reflect the most likely result of a reconfiguration caused by the departure of its child ( node b ). the method consists of having each node periodically propagate up to its parent a description of that node &# 39 ; s state ( including that node &# 39 ; s recommended parent list ) together with the state of all nodes located beneath that node and the structure of their relationship to the node in question . thus for example referring to fig2 , node &# 39 ; s i and j would propagate their information up to node e ; node k its information to node f ; nodes l and m up to node g ; nodes n and o up to node h . node e would propagate its information and its children &# 39 ; s information ( including the fact that node i is the green child of node e and node j is the red child of e ) to node c . likewise node f would propagate its information and its child &# 39 ; s information to node c ; nodes g and h their information and their children &# 39 ; s information to node d . nodes c and d would propagate their information and the information of all of their descendants to node b , and likewise node b its information and its descendants information to node a . in this manner , node a will have received information from all of the nodes in its entire sub - tree with which to populate its internal network topology model . thus , when node b departs the network , node a will be able to determine the likely result of this departure by consulting the recommended parent lists of the various nodes in its sub - tree . it should be noted at this point , that a particular node &# 39 ; s internal model of the network may not be completely accurate as configuration changes may have taken place at lower levels and those changes may not have yet propagated up to the node in question . regardless of this limitation , the information provided is judged “ good enough ” for making placement decisions and predictions as to network state following child departure . continuing with the example begun in fig2 , fig2 illustrates the first two steps of the reconfiguration begun by the graceful departure of node b . node c connects to node a , corresponding to the green child connecting to the parent of the departing node ; and node d connects to node c , corresponding to the red child of the departing node cross connecting to its green sibling . in point of fact , as illustrated in fig4 , node b instructs node c to connect to node a , and node d to connect to node c . fig2 illustrates the state of the network immediately following the connection of node c to node a and node d to node c . note that node f , the green - red grandchild of the departing node , has been bumped by node c in order to make room for node d to connect . node f wishes to connect to node e , but unfortunately since node f is type 1 and both of node e &# 39 ; s children are type 2 , node f cannot connect directly to node e . this issue can be resolved in the following way . when node f is bumped by node c , node c can consult its network topology model and determine that node e &# 39 ; s recommend parent for incoming nodes will be node i ( as node i is the green child of node e ) and pass this recommended parent directly to node f as part of the depart / bump message node c sends to node f . node a , when updating its own internal network topology model , can predict that node c will instruct node f to connect to node i , as node a can determine the recommended parents associated with every node in its sub - tree . this allows node a to update its internal model in accordance with what is likely to happen in the actual network during the reconfiguration events . fig2 illustrates the final state of the network of fig2 following the departure of node b . assuming all reconfiguration events resulting from the departure of node b proceed as planned and there are no other node additions , deletions , or reconfigurations that take place during this time period fig2 should be an accurate reflection of both the physical network and node a &# 39 ; s internal network topology model . fig3 , parts ( a )-( f ), provide a complete example of network reconfiguration following the graceful departure of a node . fig3 ( a ) shows the complete network ( full tree ) prior to the departure of a node . fig3 ( b ) illustrates the graceful departure of node 2 from the network . node 4 is instructed by the departing node to connect to node 1 and the result can be seen in fig3 ( c ). node 5 is instructed by the departing node to connect to node 4 . the particular type of join node 5 is instructed to perform with node 4 is a “ priority join ” meaning that node 4 must accept node 5 ( and therefore node 4 must bump its red child to make room for node 4 ). fig3 ( d ) illustrates the state of the network after node 5 is accepted by node 4 . note that node 9 , the former red child of node 4 , has been bumped . when node 4 bumped node 9 it provided node 9 with a connection path . that connection path included the recommended parent that node 9 should attempt to connect to . in this case node 9 is told by node 4 to connect to node 25 . the reason node 4 chose node 25 for node 9 is that node 25 is the highest node ( closest node to the server ) that node 4 is aware of that can accept a node of node 9 &# 39 ; s type . note that being of type 1n , all that can be bumped by node 9 are type 0 nodes — resulting in the candidate parents for node 9 being node 35 , node 28 , node 29 , and node 25 , of which node 25 is the closest to the server . fig3 ( e ) illustrates the state of the network after node 9 connects to node 25 . note that in order for node 25 to accept node 9 as a child , it was necessary for node 25 to bump node 34 , a type 0 normal priority node . as part of the bump message , node 25 instructs node 34 to attempt to connect to node 9 ( either for a direct connection or for instructions as to where it can connect ). node 34 attempts to connect to node 9 , the root of a type 1 chain that terminates in a type 0 low priority node ( node 26 ). since node 34 &# 39 ; s type 0 normal priority out ranks node 26 &# 39 ; s type 0 low priority , node 9 instructs node 34 to connect to node 26 &# 39 ; s parent , node 17 . since node 26 cannot connect to node 34 or node 17 , node 26 must climb it parent path , beginning with the first type 2 node in the path , node 4 , and , if necessary , working back up the parent path towards the server . in this case , however , node 4 is able to recommend connection to node 29 and the reconfiguration cascade concludes . fig3 ( f ) illustrates the final configuration of the network . fig3 , parts ( a )-( d ), provide a complete example of network reconfiguration following the unexpected ( non - graceful ) departure of a node . fig3 ( a ) illustrates a complete network prior to an unexpected departure of node 6 , a type 2 normal priority node . after the departure of node 6 , its children , nodes 12 and 13 , note its absence . both node 12 and node 13 connect to their grandparent , node 3 . at this point a “ race condition ” exists between node 12 and node 13 . whichever node first connects to node 3 will be allowed to join as its child . in this case we assume that node 12 arrives first and is added as a child of node 3 . fig3 ( b ) illustrates the state of affairs at this point . node 13 then attempts to connect to node 3 . since node 13 is a type 1 high priority node , node 3 has three potential slots at which it could place node 13 . these are : ( 1 ) as a child of node 12 , ( 2 ) as a child of node 23 , or ( 3 ) as a child of node 15 . since node 12 is the closest potential parent to the root of the tree , node 3 tells node 13 to connect to node 12 . node 13 then connects to node 12 causing it to bump node 21 , a type 1 normal priority node . as node 12 bumps node 21 , it tells the node to connect to node 13 for a connection path . the situation at this point is illustrated in fig3 ( c ). node 13 tells node 21 to connect to node 22 . node 21 does so , causing node 22 to bump its type 0 normal priority child , node 31 . node 31 attempts to connect to node 21 but is rejected and must climb its path . eventually , node 31 finds a home as a child of node 32 . while the invention has been particularly shown and described with reference to a preferred embodiment thereof , it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details may be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention .