On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 05:42:45PM +0200, Christian Grothoff wrote: > 2) Yes, running in the 'global' network with outdated peers is likely to > cause all kinds of fun problems, as the DHT may or may not work, or in > the worst case the DHT discovers a path which then does not work on the > CADET layer because some hop speaks just enough of the DHT protocol but > not enough of the CADET protocol.
Maybe the basics of protocol design aren't as exciting as inventing new crypto paradigms, but could we please increment the protocol number each time a change is introduced that will not be compatible with the past? Yes, I know that only parts are incompatible - but I don't care. There is nobody out there that we have to be backward compatible for. We can increment the protocol version identifier for each edit of any CADET file for another year before the whole thing is stable - and then, for the next release we can just revert it to your favorite number. Also, shouldn't all those "misbehaving" old nodes be automatically bypassed thanks to our amazing detection of sybil attacks? Half a year ago we had a working CADET and a frequently working gnunet-social. Why do we have to go three steps back? _______________________________________________ GNUnet-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
