On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 05:25:39PM -0400, Ken Snider wrote: > Michael Rogers wrote: > > >>Matthew Toseland wrote: > >> > >>Can we add in insert verification later on? > > > >Are we even sure it can be done? If not, adding a tit-for-tat mechanism > >based on the number of requests answered will just create an incentive > >to drop inserts (and possibly lie about it) in order to answer more > >requests. > > Wouldn't a fairly safe fix in the case of inserts be some sort of hashing > mechanism that guarantees the validity of the insert versus what some peer > of ours expects the hash to be for that same chunk of data? Something akin > to a "ring of trust" for the validity of a particular block of data?
I'm not sure what you are talking about. What needs to be verified is that the insert was actually forwarded and stored. > > --Ken. -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20060822/f8966047/attachment.pgp>
