> -----Original Message----- > From: devl-bounces at freenetproject.org > [mailto:devl-bounces at freenetproject.org] On Behalf Of > bbackde at googlemail.com > Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 7:40 AM > To: Discussion of development issues > Subject: Re: [freenet-dev] CMKs don't work,but there are > other options was Re: Easy top block duplication:Content > Multiplication Keys > > Long CHK keys are ok for me, most important is that they are > static and all inserts produces the same key.
I second that. I want the ability to re-insert already inserted files without changing the URI. > On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 03:06, Matthew Toseland > <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> wrote: > > On Thursday 23 April 2009 21:14:01 guido wrote: > >> Am Donnerstag 23 April 2009 14:48:43 schrieb Matthew Toseland: > >> > I would really appreciate input on option 2 i.e. how much of a > >> > problem are long CHKs? > >> > >> If CHK key lengths as they are now are not bad enough to > keep people > >> from using them, then making them 50% longer won't be, either. > > > > Twice as long. > >> > >> Besides, making the pathname of the file a mandatory part > of the key > >> is > > already > >> having larger impact on average key lengths then this would. > > _______________________________________________ > > Devl mailing list > > Devl at freenetproject.org > > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > > > > > > -- > __________________________________________________ > GnuPG key: (0x48DBFA8A) > Keyserver: pgpkeys.pca.dfn.de > Fingerprint: > 477D F057 1BD4 1AE7 8A54 8679 6690 E2EC 48DB FA8A > __________________________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
