[rc5] Re: Tardy blocks (was Random keyblocks)

Jeff Lawson jlawson at hmc.edu
Tue Aug 26 05:03:05 EDT 1997

At 03:16 PM 8/25/97 -0600, Eric Gindrup wrote:
>> Would it be equally valuable to "pass out" tardy blocks to be 
>> handled by detached clients?
>Tardy blocks?  If you mean blocks that have been checked out for 
>a long time, then no, not really.  A block that has been checked 
>out, but never reported back has no more chance to be "the" block 
>than the next one in the hand-out queue.

In fact, "tardy" blocks have *less* probability of containing the solution
key because many of the tardy blocks caused by computers crashing in the
middle of a block.  This means that if they crashed while processing a
block, then a solution had not yet been found in that block (because if it
had, the block would have been stopped there and the solution-notification
written to the buff-out).  And since we have not yet received any legitmate
solution notfications, well.. make your own conclusion.

Even if you assume that only a very small percentage of the "tardy" blocks
became lost because of a mid-block crash, that small percentage still makes
it more probable that a block that hadn't been distributed at all before
will contain the solution key.

To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo at llamas.net with 'unsubscribe rc5' in the body.

More information about the rc5 mailing list