~dr|z3d
@RN
@StormyCloud
@eyedeekay
@orignal
@postman
@zzz
%Liorar
+FreefallHeavens
+Leopold
+Xeha
+goose2_
+j6
+onon_
+poriori
+profetikla
+r00tobo
+snex
+uop23ip
+weko
An0nm0n
Arch
Danny
DeltaOreo
DiCEy1904
Irc2PGuest11229
Irc2PGuest48909
Irc2PGuest54864
Irc2PGuest6753
Nausicaa
Onn4l7h
T3s|4
acetone_
anon2
anontor
anu
bak83
boonst
fujifilm
goose2
itsjustme_
mareki2pb
no
not_bob_afk
pisslord
qend-irc2p
shiver_
thetia
u5657
xen_NULL
orignal
yes I do now
orignal
Blinded message
orignal
I don't know what's wrong if someone publishes too many introducers?
orignal
2 concerns: size of RI and 2 digits index
dr|z3d
orignal: if there's a fixed amount set in the code, and someone's going out of their way to modify the code, chances are they're up to no good.
dr|z3d
based on recent attacks, assume the worst.
dr|z3d
so I ask again, what's a reasonable amount for decent network connectivity? is there any justification for more than 5?
zzz
this whole discusssion is silly, there's no agreement necessary
zzz
it's an extensible format. It's not appropriate to put something in the spec that some undefined options are illegal
zzz
additionally, when under attack, implementations are free to use whatever heuristics they want to take whatever action they want
zzz
that also doesn't belong in the specs
dr|z3d
ok, zzz, thanks for the input :)
dr|z3d
I'm going to stick with max 5 for now before ban unless I hear a persuasive argument for increasing the toleration.