[RC5] DES 2 (in preparation of)

Mary Conner trif at serv.net
Thu Jan 8 21:23:27 EST 1998

I think I'm going to hunt down and shoot the next person who sends
something both to me and the list.

On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Colin L. Hildinger wrote:

> Yeah, I understand that, but even if they just waited until we'd
> finished the next prefixe it wouldn't be that big of a deal.  It would
> still mean that said blocks were distributed several months in the past
> until we get a keyrate several times what we have right now.

It's no big deal to d.net.  Yes, we'd blow through those 50 blocks in
nothing flat.  It's just that I hear a lot of people saying they run
with bigger in-buffers or flush manually because, "I'd rather not have
my machine doing random blocks if it can't get to a keyserver."  I want
them to realize that if they do not let that in-buffer empty, then 
when they eventually do have a situation where they can't flush, 
they're going to be doing worse than random blocks, they're going to
be doing blocks that have already been done, and then they'll come
in here screaming their bloody heads off wanting to know why stats
lost 50 of their precious blocks.

Official Non-Lawyer
Official dbaker Irritant

To unsubcribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at llamas.net
rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest

More information about the rc5 mailing list