[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: Proposal: remove down routers from consensus

To: or-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Proposal: remove down routers from consensus
From: Peter Palfrader <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:07:32 +0200
Delivered-to: archiver@xxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: or-dev-outgoing@xxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: or-dev@xxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 17:07:37 -0400
In-reply-to: <20080612210151.GC20444@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Mail-followup-to: or-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
References: <20080612202841.GC9422@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080612205614.GB20444@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080612205805.GE9422@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080612210151.GC20444@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: or-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-or-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)

On Thu, 12 Jun 2008, Geoffrey Goodell wrote:

> This would make the consensus document smaller -- I am not sure why the
> consensus document includes routers that are not in dir/server/all, but
> last I checked it did.  This fact bothers me more than the fact that
> some of the routers are not Running.

Sorry for being a bit dense here, but what's your point?  Who uses
dir/server/all anyway?  And is there anything you have to say about this
idea of making the consensus smaller?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Proposal: remove down routers from consensus
  - From: Geoffrey Goodell

References:
- Proposal: remove down routers from consensus
  - From: Peter Palfrader
- Re: Proposal: remove down routers from consensus
  - From: Geoffrey Goodell
- Re: Proposal: remove down routers from consensus
  - From: Peter Palfrader
- Re: Proposal: remove down routers from consensus
  - From: Geoffrey Goodell

Prev by Author: Re: Proposal: remove down routers from consensus
Next by Author: Re: Proposal: remove down routers from consensus
Previous by thread: Re: Proposal: remove down routers from consensus
Next by thread: Re: Proposal: remove down routers from consensus
Index(es):
- Author
- Thread