-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 27 Jun 2006, at 12:24, Matthew Toseland wrote: > Do we want semi-opennet support? This would be a way to connect, with > mutual advance consent, to peers of our direct peers? (There would be > measures taken to ensure that we don't connect to peers of their > direct > peers). Why not implement proper opennet? Your stated objection was previously based on something Oskar apparently said, or didn't say, but he now seems to think we should do it (in fact, I think this was always his opinion). I agree that we need to simulate it to ensure that destination sampling (aka LRU) can co-exist with location swapping, but that should be a relatively straight-forward simulation, Oskar may even do it for us :-) Ian. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin) iD8DBQFEoaq3QtgxRWSmsqwRAntBAJ9cKy0YcJO9bzJTetPvXXN5154VNwCfVewD SzkIU8z4EK7kRecX7SOKZ0c= =384/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
