> >yeah, I would prefer "PrimaryKey" as well, since we will probably > >have search keys later on and that will get confusing. Or maybe > >"RoutingKey"? > > I vote for RoutingKey. > I have been thinking why can we not have all the wholesome goodness of KHK > and mix in some of the nice features of CHK and SVK's > I think it is reasonable to expect people to be able to know the RoutingKey > (KHK) if they know either CHK or SVK but not so the other way around. > You could keep the KHK as the RoutingKey and introduce an optional > verificationKey. (or several).
The name "RoutingKey" is OK (though I still prefer PrimaryKey), but you can't route by KHK without conflicts. One pf the primary reasons for having CHKs and SVKs is to eliminate keyspace hogging. -- Lee Daniel Crocker <lee at piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
