Re: [tor-dev] an alternate MyFamily definition

[Andreas Krey <a.krey@xxxxxx>]

On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 19:03:06 +0000, tagnaq wrote:
...
> Why?
> This would reduce the configuration effort required when adding a new
> relay to *two* relays regardless of how many relays are in your family.

True, but: If one relay disappears for a while then the family may
break into two if it was the only joint. So from an operative point
a bit more redundancy would be helpful.

...
> A family member must have a *mutual* agreement with at least *one* node.

That's (the *mutual*) is an important point that wasn't immediately
clear from the preceding. Otherwise I alone can put everything in a
single family under this definition. :-)

Andreas

-- 
"Totally trivial. Famous last words."
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@*.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:21 -0800
_______________________________________________
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev