Tad, did you make this statement: > So no divergence would occur as > it would in many TP2 systems.
based on Dan having said this?: > What is described above is a classic TP2 puzzle. In a peer-to-peer > system this would represent divergence amongst peers. In wave it just > gives a plain weird result. I see it as not preserving the intention > of the users. What Dan meant there was that peer-to-peer systems that don't solve the TP2 puzzle diverge. peer-to-peer (multiparty) systems that *do* solve the TP2 puzzle always provable converge, and do so while preserving the intended AB ordering. Jesse On Mar 1, 10:04 am, David BL <[email protected]> wrote: > On Feb 28, 3:22 am, Tad Glines <[email protected]> wrote: > > > While in one of the 6 cases wave would produce "BA" instead of "AB" all > > clients would converge on the same result. > > Yes, wave can impose a spurious total ordering in the sense that it's > not a *linear extension* of all the partial orderings of elements as > they appear on individual sites. > > > So no divergence would occur as > > it would in many TP2 systems. > > What makes you think that? Ressel proved that a system that supports > TP1/TP2 necessarily converges. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave Protocol" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en.
