Re: Proposal: Network status entries need a new Unnamed flag

[Roger Dingledine <arma@xxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 12:46:59PM -0400, Nick Mathewson wrote:
> > > (This whole proposal is meant only for v3 dir flags; we shouldn't try
> > > to backport it to the v2 dir world.)
> > 
> > Can we still list the unnamed routers in the v2 status, even without an
> > unnamed flag?  Because if not and I enable auto-naming on tor26 I'll stop
> > listing about 150 routers for using names that are already taken.
> 
> That shouldn't be a problem ; the v2 status is generated pretty
> independently from the v3 consensus.  I think it's best to leave v2
> directories more or less alone and reserve new features for the v3
> directory system only.

If Peter adds many lines to his approved-routers file (as he is suggesting
he'll do), then these will affect both v2 and v3 networkstatuses. If we
only have this Unnamed thing for v3, then the result is that Peter's v2
authority will stop listing about 15% of the network. This is bad.

Unless we add a notion of Naming that applies only to v3.

Hm.
--Roger