At Wed, 18 Jun 2008 07:34:24 -0800, Michael Chen wrote: > > Cullen, > > Having the same NodeId size on the wire as in computing memory makes > programming much easier.
Without addressing the generic question of whether NodeIds should be variable length, I don't really think the appropriate size of NodeId is that related to the size of the hash function you happen to be using to convert Resource names to Resource-Ids. Obviously, the size of the hash function ought to be large enough to fill the entire Resource/Node-Id space, but, the converse is not true. Moreover, the cryptographic security requirements that dictate the current set of hash function sizes aren't really the same as what we need here. If you're using, say, SHA-256, it's trivial to have it emit a 128-bit value simply by truncating. If you like, you can think of this as a new hash function called "SHA-256-truncated-to-128". -Ekr _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
