It's a low priority item, as I've explained. Incentives are important, but there are more urgent matters.
On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 10:44:50AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > > On 25 May 2006, at 10:18, Matthew Toseland wrote: > >Agreed. We should detect it, but it's not a load balancing issue. > > Ok, so does this mean that we can agree that we can apply my "network > debt" proposal to inserts - even though it doesn't account for the > possibility of deliberately dropped inserts (we can mitigate against > this later with some kind of low-probability inserts verification)? > > Don't forget, people are supposed to be able to trust their immediate > peers not to do things like drop inserts... > > Ian. -- 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/20060525/341d36b1/attachment.pgp>
