On Friday 08 May 2009 04:33:26 Jusa Saari wrote: > On Thu, 07 May 2009 21:54:34 -0400, Juiceman wrote: > > > Something as simple as "1111" or "2222" or "3333" would be enough to > > change the hash of the CHK and would be a known value so we could recreate > > the missing CHKs and reinsert them, yes? > > Or just use numerical procession: "1", "2" ... "23", "24"... > > > ie we have a m...@key1blahblah, key2blahblah, key3blahblah/somefilename.avi > > (or CHK instead of MHK, whatever works) We are not able to find key1 or > > key3, but we are able to retrieve key2 and successfully download the > > entire file. Then as part of the FEC healing mechanism we can recreate > > key1 and key3 just by taking key2 and changing the field from "2222" to > > "1111" and another with "3333" and insert them back into the network. > > Does this sound feasible? > > Yeah, it should work and be fairly trivial to implement.
This is more or less what MHKs/DHKs are: MHK@<hash>,<routingkey1>,<routingkey2>,<routingkey3>/<mandatory and ignored filename>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
