r15612@catbus: nickm | 2007-10-09 19:11:55 -0400

 Clarify proposal 122 and add another note.

svn:r11824

diff --git a/doc/spec/proposals/122-unnamed-flag.txt b/doc/spec/proposals/122-unnamed-flag.txt
index da280e594aaa1624e37d94984e1911c2cafefad3..185480be01e3f5945830a701b21fbfe755b19d82 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/spec/proposals/122-unnamed-flag.txt
+++ b/doc/spec/proposals/122-unnamed-flag.txt
@@ -43,8 +43,10 @@ Status: Open
 2. The stopgap solution:
 
   tor26 should start accepting and listing the imposters, but it should
-  assign them a new flag: "Unnamed". This would produce three cases in
-  terms of assigning flags:
+  assign them a new flag: "Unnamed".
+
+  This would produce three cases in terms of assigning flags in the consensus
+  networkstatus:
 
   i) a router gets the Named flag in the v3 networkstatus if
     a) it's the only router with that nickname that has the Named flag
@@ -98,6 +100,11 @@ Status: Open
   entire period. We could solve this by making the voting more complex,
   but that doesn't seem worth it.
 
+  [3.3. Tor26 is only one tor26.
+
+  We need more naming authorities, possibly with some kind of auto-naming
+  feature.  This is out-of-scope for this proposal -NM]
+
 4. Other benefits:
 
   This new flag will allow people to operate servers that happen to have