On Fri, Aug 18, 2000 at 02:50:40PM +0700, Oskar Sandberg wrote: <snip>
> In fact, we would probably be best off making the Address > model more complete, so the DataSource part of a message might look like: > > DataSource.Fingerprint=ababab12344378985de > DataSource.Number=A6 > DataSource.physical.tcp=tcp/192.168.1.1:1234 > DataSource.physical.tcp-ipv6=ipv6/aaaa:bbbb:cccc:dddd:1234 > DataSource.physical.inuit-smoke-signal=loc/77?12'45''N44?32'3''W > DataSource.physical.pots-zmodem=pots/+6217250027 > > etc. > > Connections to any of the addresses would be authenticated to have that > fingerprint, so how could it matter if somebody moved into the same ip > range or if another group of Eskimos took over that particular igloo? > > If a connection to one of the addresses listed failed, the node would give > the address to the ARK thread, which goes back to look up > ARK(ababab12344378985de,A7) to see if there is an updated answer there. If > there is, the data would of course be expected to have the same > fingerprint (and be signed by the actual pk), and whatever new physical > addresses were found would still also be expected to authenticate > themselves just like before. > I like the serial number idea. No need to check all datasource entries, just the most recent. Oh, and you forgot- DataSource.physical.drum=beat/4+4 |: . * . * . * . | . * . * . * . :| D Schutt _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
