[RC5] LIFO? Is this true?

lunaslide lunaslyd at pacbell.net
Thu May 7 02:43:39 EDT 1998

Hash: SHA1

At 12:10 PM 5/6/98 -0500, you wrote:
>On Tue, 5 May 1998, Barry Wright wrote:
>> LIFO? Is this true?
>> If so there must be some blocks at the bottom of my buffer which have been
>> festering there for weeks.
>> Why is it designed this way?
>> regards,  Barry
>that's a good question... i asked a similar one before and didn't really
>get the answer i was looking for... ;)  one would think dupage would/could
>be decreased by using a FIFO technique.  I probably have blocks that are
>close to 3 months old on some clients.
>this brings up another question.... are the Proxy servers LIFO or FIFO??
>i hope FIFO.... i keep a 1000 key buffer... i know it can go weeks
>before completely getting emptied. (usually takes a network outage)

The PProxy is FIFO, probably due to the much larger number of blocks they
usually contain.  If you are just running the client on some unconnected
machines, just watch the logs for a few days to judge their speed and set
the in:out limits accordingly.

lunaslide           *          PGP key->pgpkeys.mit.edu port 11371
 *     *        *               *         *     *            *    
The problem with Microsoft is that they just have no taste.       
           *            -Steve Jobs                 *             
*        *             *     *          *                *       *
Get active now.  Join Bovine.  Crack RC5 and other weak encryption
to protect your privacy.  http://www.distributed.net/rc5/         

Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3


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

More information about the rc5 mailing list