Re: directory authority/authorities need(s) updating?

[Scott Bennett <bennett@xxxxxxxxxx>]

     On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 15:27:01 +0100 Andrew <tor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>|      Last night I reported here that the directory authorities are in
>| disagreement over client-versions and server-versions.  Tonight they are
>| still in disagreement.  The consensus documents still fail to list any
>| development branch versions later than 0.2.0.15-alpha as server-versions.
>|      When will the directory authority operators correct these two 
>problems?
>|
>The same notice shows up in my log after installing a fresh Tor 
>0.2.0.18-alpha (r13293) around noon today.

     The latest consensus file appears to have 0.2.0.18-alpha listed as
a recommended server version, but not 0.2.0.16-alpha or 0.2.0.17-alpha,
even though it still lists 0.2.0.11-alpha, 0.2.0.12-alpha, and
0.2.0.15-alpha.  Also, the individual status documents are still in
considerable disagreement with each other.  Are the directory authority
operators getting careless?

>By the way, if anyone cares: as of today, my node "cerebellum" is back 
>up! Only as a relay for now, but better a fast relay than nothing, right?
>
     Welcome back!


                                  Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**********************************************************************
* Internet:       bennett at cs.niu.edu                              *
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
* "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good  *
* objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments *
* -- a standing army."                                               *
*    -- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790         *
**********************************************************************