On Tue, 15 May 2001, Ian Clarke wrote: > For those who think that layer #2 should be a front-end to layer #1, all > you are doing is adding unnescessary bloat. Any smart implementation of > layer #2 will interface directly with the node, and there will be no > incentive to use layer #1.
I disagree. Nodes have enough to do already. Layers 2 and 3 should be implemented as a separate program, in order to prevent duplication of effort and incompatibilities (which will be hell for client writers). However, you did convince me that layer 3 makes sense. Many applications require requesting sets of keys in the background. Flexibility is a major problem. We should allow clients to submit scripts for execution (perhaps with guile? python?). The scripts can progress
