Nick Tarleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thursday 24 July 2003 10:17 pm, Scott Young wrote: > > Another possible correlation might be in file size. High bandwidth > > nodes would be good at transferring large files, but low bandwidth low > > latency nodes would be like express lanes for small files. With the new > > CHK specification, the file size could be used as a variable to learn > > with in the routing and data deletion algorithms.
Just a note: the CHK specs haven't changed, it's just been made publicly available that CHKs have a size byte. They've always had it. > Actually, to nitpick, this would have nothing to do with the CHK > specification. Nodes only know the routing keys, which are the hashes of the > CHK/SSK/KSK. Still, a node can determine the key size directly. > I would love to see this, as it would mean I (on dialup) could become a useful > permanent node. The routing keys are derived from the CHK/SSK/KSK, but it's not quite just the hash. in the case of KSK, it's a double hash, plus some stuff[1]. For CHKs, the part before the , in the key _is_ the routing key. If you really wanted to know for SSKs, it's Hash(Hash(pubkey) + docname) plus some stuff. In any case, you'd be _for_ having nodes only traffic in small keys? That's an interesting idea. Thelema [1] stuff = log2 size and a key type identifier -- E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Raabu and Piisu GPG 1024D/36352AAB fpr:756D F615 B4F3 BFFC 02C7 84B7 D8D7 6ECE 3635 2AAB _______________________________________________ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
