On Friday 01 August 2008 20:40, Florent Daignière wrote: > * Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-08-01 19:31:35]: > > > On Tuesday 22 July 2008 17:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Author: nextgens > > > Date: 2008-07-22 16:52:25 +0000 (Tue, 22 Jul 2008) > > > New Revision: 21320 > > > > > > Modified: > > > trunk/freenet/src/freenet/node/NodeDispatcher.java > > > Log: > > > Implement the FOAF-attack-mitigation hack > > > > IMHO we should accept the new location but ignore the FOAF locations, no? > > > > > It can't happen from a genuine node; imho it makes sense to prune that > node out of routing altogether (and that's what happens as a side effect > of not accepting any location from it). > No, we'd keep the previous loc, wouldn't we?
pgpj0laUvhBZl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
