On Wednesday 01 April 2009 19:40:37 Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 8:29 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > Yes, we need to chunk, because we can't hand the data on to the client until
> > we've verified it, at least in a serious implementation.
>
> Hmmm.
On Wednesday 01 April 2009 11:11:23 tri...@samba.org wrote:
> The per-block rolling hash should also be randomly seeded as Martin
> mentioned. That way if the user does ask for the page again then the
> hashing will be different. You need to send that seed along with the
> request.
Hi Tridge,
On Wednesday 01 April 2009 15:52:22 Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 12:48 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > Well, 'strong' here is relative. In order to keep the checksum length
> > finite and hence encode more blocks we only use a portion of the bits; it&#
On Tuesday 31 March 2009 23:29:23 Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Toby Collett wrote:
> > There is no error checking in the encoding itself, this is assumed to be
> > taken care in other layers, and we through in a strong hash on the whole
> > file to make sure this is co
Hi,
Tridge just cc'd me on on a GSOC rsync-http mozilla project; given that
Martin is coordinating an apache proxy plugin, I thought I'd send a big
inclusive mail to make sure we all know about each other!
My involvement: a crcsync module in CCAN which can be used as a (simplified)
librsy
