I'm still at a bit of a loss as to how one can effectively do a "greedy"
seal over a broken chain in a deterministic fashion.
I've been discussing this with Seth. Particularly once we start doing
parallel chains for different algorithms, different implementations will
disagree about what's a
I'm still at a bit of a loss as to how one can effectively do a "greedy"
seal over a broken chain in a deterministic fashion. I'm also not sure why
one would report much of anything (back to the hypothetical sending domain)
from a broken chain, given that it has no validity.
--Kurt
On Fri, Aug
I'd say that I agree with John (and Seth) on this one. I'm not sure if a
consensus was reached, though it doesn't appear so. I think the idea that
being able to have trust in the broken chain information potentially sent back
to us as a report has value. It's hard to be sure that the value
