Gianni Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I want to make the following changes to the SplitFile metadata spec: > > 0) Optional CHK checksum of the entire file. > SplitFile.CheckSum=CHK@blahblah blah > Why not just put this into the Info.* metadata? There's already this place for it. It's a good thing to allow authors to put the Checksum in the metadata, but I'm not certain that it belongs in the SplitFile.* section.
> 1) Specification of cipher used for all block CHKs > SplitFile.BlockCipher=TwoFish > I'm opposed to this for the reason that it will make splitfile processing a node-only procedure, when it rightfully lies outside the realm of the node's influence. > 2) Explicit requirement that block CHKs contain data only. > i.e. so if you know the cipher and you know the block size and you > have the data, you should be able to reinsert the block without any further > information. > This is a hard one. It is/should be *extremely* recommended that all CHKs contain only data and no metadata. I admit that I can't see a use for splitfile pieces to have any sort of metadata, but that doesn't mean that there isn't one. If someone inserts a splitfile with metadata in the CHK blocks, they deserve having their splitfile be not easily re-insertable, but I don't see any need to label what they did as "invalid" or as being outside the spec. > 3) Explicit requirement that trailing blocks are zero padded to the block > size. > I'm against padding trailing blocks; It's needed for FEC, it's a waste of space otherwise. > 4) Explicit segmentation in the SplitFile metadata. > The FEC encoding stuff already "segments" large files. FEC encoding is only > done over the data in each segment. I want to make this explicit in the > SplitFile metadata. i.e. > I see what you're doing and why you're doing it, I'm just not sure that I like having the extra layer for regular splitfiles. Splitfiles are a really simple thing, and should be kept as simple as possible. <SNIP example> > > What do people think? > > -- gj > As an alternative to explicit segmentation, why not just build a heirarchical splitfile? i.e. have as your main document a meta-splitfile, where each block is a FEC splitfile. This keeps normal splitfiles as they should be, while the structure of the metadata is able to accurately represent what's going on at the lower levels. Thelema -- E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Raabu and Piisu GPG 1024D/36352AAB fpr:756D F615 B4F3 BFFC 02C7 84B7 D8D7 6ECE 3635 2AAB _______________________________________________ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
