Matthew Toseland wrote:
> I'm not sure that this would solve the problem though. A hostile node could 
> probably get most of the keyspace, and therefore most of the local requests, 
> without interfering with the target's specialisation, which is where most of 
> its remote requests come in...?

Hmm, good point. That also applies to any fixed limit like 20% though,
doesn't it?

This brings us back to the old problem that any request that's far from
the previous hop's specialisation probably originated at the previous hop...

Cheers,
Michael
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to