~dr|z3d
@RN
@StormyCloud
@T3s|4_
@eyedeekay
@not_bob_afk
@orignal
@postman
@zzz
%Liorar
%RTP
%acetone
%cumlord
%mareki2p
%snex
+H20
+Onn4l7h
+Onn4|7h
+Over
+leopold_
+onon_
+poriori
+profetikla
+qend-irc2p
+r00tobo_BNC
+uop23ip
+xHarr
Arch2
BubbRubb
Dann
DeltaOreo
Guest99
Irc2PGuest65801
Irc2PGuest74254
Irc2PGuest90985
Irc2PGuest95708
Meow
Sh0ck
Stormycl1
T3s|4
ac9f_
anontor2
duck
floatyfloatilla
gelleger1
gellegery
mahlay
makoto
n1
nZDoYBkF__
nilbog
ntty
null911
r00tobo[2]
shiver_
simprelay
solidx66
thetia
tr
u5657
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.