[PROXYPER] Recycling keys
Jim C. Nasby
jim at nasby.net
Thu Aug 26 19:08:57 EDT 1999
This is correct. The entire 64 bit keyspace is divided into 256 56 bit
subspaces. In the past, we had a problem with keeping too many subspaces on the
master. This is no longer the case, and due to this, we havn't recycled any keys
in probably close to a year. We still state that we consider keys handed out
more than 60 days ago as 'old' or 'lost' simply because we may need to start
closing out subspaces in the future. When that does happen, we don't want people
to start yelling. :) Besides, it's rather desireable to connect at least once a
month if at all possible.
This is something that will probably end up changing eventually. For example,
CSC is a 56 bit key contest. We'll hopefully be recycling keys for that contest
a week or two after it starts, simply because we'll be out of keys at that
point. The requirements for OGR may be such that we need to get keys in within a
month or so.
We'll just have to wait and see what happens.
Scott Lockwood wrote:
> Basically, as I understand it, the keys are organized into blocks. When a
> large section of the keyspace is completed, it's data is moved somewhere
> else. There isn't room enough to hold the entire key space, so when we come
> close to completing a large block of keys, they unretured keys are reissued
> to close out that block. This allows us to move on to the next large chunk
> of the key space.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mike Morrow <mike at micratek.com>
> To: <proxyper at lists.distributed.net>
> Sent: Thursday, August 26, 1999 12:50 PM
> Subject: [PROXYPER] Recycling keys
> To D.Net folks,
> Why would you use time recycling keys after a month or two months or EVER
> until they are needed again, naturally.
> If I were to design it, I would mark a key done when it is returned and not
> issue that one again. When someone wanted a key, I would issue one that
> had not been marked. That is all. No time issues to deal with at
> all. That seems to be useless overhead with its associated possibility for
> errors, like any code.
> Maybe my view of this is cracked, being far removed from the project but I
> just never have been able to figure out why anything other than issuing
> unchecked keys is being done. If I am way off on this, then I apologize in
> My summation is: Are some keys more important than others? If not, then
> this timed recycling is sillyness. If so, then I just don't understand the
> Thanks for any enlightenment on this.
> Mike Morrow
> _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ From the computer room of:
> _/_/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ Mike/W5MDM (was AB6NN)
> _/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/_/ Mike at MicraTek.com
> _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ 38°04'43.7"N, 122°12'20.5"W
> _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ 310 feet elevation, MSL
> AOL/IM: W5MDM -- ICQ: 5056515 Homepage: http://www.micratek.com
> The legal system is the dark shadow of justice.
> To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe proxyper' to
> majordomo at lists.distributed.net
> To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe proxyper' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
Jim C. Nasby (aka Decibel!) /^\
jim at nasby.net /___\
Freelance lighting designer and database developer / | \
Member: Triangle Fraternity, Sports Car Club of America /___|___\
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe proxyper' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
More information about the proxyper