From: Nick Mathewson Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 23:12:04 +0000 (+0000) Subject: r15612@catbus: nickm | 2007-10-09 19:11:55 -0400 X-Git-Tag: tor-0.2.0.8-alpha~50 X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=f3139b3dbc139495d915f7db5fff7451a726d3ad;p=thirdparty%2Ftor.git 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 da280e594a..185480be01 100644 --- 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