On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 04:44:33PM -0500, Tavin Cole wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 09:45:46PM +0100, Oskar Sandberg wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 01:51:26PM -0600, Edgar Friendly wrote: > > < > > > > And I ask "why are we giving that information?" I don't see it being > > > any use except to someone trying to trace the path of a request. > > > Maybe it's useful for debugging (although I don't think we currently > > > make _any_ use of it), but I'd like to have this removed by 1.0. > > > > It is for debugging, and it is going away as soon as we are confident > > that things are working well. > > Just to be clear, your plan is to remove the reason strings but retain > the HTL value in the QRej message?
The HTL value belongs in the QR. Without it, it is impossible for nodes to know how many hops were taken down the fork. The reason string, OTOH, is a functionally unnecessary and should be retained only while debugging. I believe very strongly that the node should give only the minimum possible information about itself, so in a final FNP protocol there should be no reason or version or anything like it strings. -- Oskar Sandberg oskar at freenetproject.org _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
