On 09/27/2016 02:39 AM, Jeremy Rand wrote: > Relatedly -- I had some trouble summarizing some of the items in the > Namecoin section because the security, privacy, and scalability > properties of Namecoin are somewhat different depending on whether the > user is using a full node (downloads the entire blockchain), a FBR-C > node (receives full blocks that can contain current name transactions), > or a headers-only node (receives only block headers). > > I didn't want to change the layout of the page much without asking, but > would it make sense to split the Namecoin section into multiple sections > (a section for each of those node types)? Or is it preferred to keep > them in 1 section and say which of the security properties / drawbacks > apply to which node types (which is what I've done for the moment)? This is a fair point. I agree that we should split it up accordingly to "Namecoin (full blockchain)" and "Namecoin (thin/SPV client)". Both have different descriptions, security properties, and drawbacks so it would probably be more organized this way. -- Jesse
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev