[or-cvs] r11824: Clarify proposal 122 and add another note. (in tor/trunk: . doc/spec/proposals)

[nickm@xxxxxxxx]

Author: nickm
Date: 2007-10-09 19:12:04 -0400 (Tue, 09 Oct 2007)
New Revision: 11824

Modified:
   tor/trunk/
   tor/trunk/doc/spec/proposals/122-unnamed-flag.txt
Log:
 r15612@catbus:  nickm | 2007-10-09 19:11:55 -0400
 Clarify proposal 122 and add another note.



Property changes on: tor/trunk
___________________________________________________________________
 svk:merge ticket from /tor/trunk [r15612] on 8246c3cf-6607-4228-993b-4d95d33730f1

Modified: tor/trunk/doc/spec/proposals/122-unnamed-flag.txt
===================================================================
--- tor/trunk/doc/spec/proposals/122-unnamed-flag.txt	2007-10-09 23:02:02 UTC (rev 11823)
+++ tor/trunk/doc/spec/proposals/122-unnamed-flag.txt	2007-10-09 23:12:04 UTC (rev 11824)
@@ -43,9 +43,11 @@
 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
        out of all the votes, and
@@ -98,6 +100,11 @@
   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