~dr|z3d
@RN
@RN_
@StormyCloud
@T3s|4
@T3s|4_
@eyedeekay
@not_bob_afk
@orignal
@postman
@zzz
%acetone
%cumlord
+FreefallHeavens
+Xeha
+ardu
+bak83_
+mareki2p
+profetikla
+qend-irc2p
+r00tobo_BNC
+segfault
+uop23ip
+weko
AHON1
Arch
BubbRubb
Danny
DeltaOreo
Irc2PGuest15440
Irc2PGuest52560
Irc2PGuest63604
Irc2PGuest79272
Meow
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
SigSegv
T3s|4__
anontor2
boonst
carried6590
duck
maylay
onon_1
pisslord
poriori_
r3med1tz-
shiver_
simprelay
solidx66
thetia
u5657
usr001
zer0bitz
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.