It has been stated that ripple reaches to consensus with mathematical certainty. If we analyze the consensus protocol, we can see that a specific validator can have a very narrow view of the state of the rest of the validators. At least 80% of his unl list must have proposed to include the transaction. Each of them received from 70% of their unl list such a proposal etc....
Unless all those nodes represent the 80% of the unl list of any validator, one cannot assume that the initial validator has knowledge there has been a global consensus on the new ledger.
A problematic example is a unl graph whose directed distance is more than 6 and has low connectivity.
Is this correct? if true what are the assumptions ripple makes on the unl graph so that the above happens?
Edit: wouldn't 2 disconnected networks reach to 2 different consensi, and thus have complete luck of knowledge of the second consensus? If we assume a graph and 2 subgraphs that are connected but have a core that is far away from their boundary. A validator that is inside that core, it will assume that consensus has been reached and only the validators at the boundary will know that there is no consensus. In other words, shouldn't the unl list be build by a uniform random selection of all the trustworthy validators,or there is chance to not be able to detect the absense of consensus?