[tor-dev] Proposal: Don't include package fingerprints in consensus documents

[teor]

> On 23 Feb 2019, at 02:10, Iain Learmonth <irl at torproject.org> wrote:
> 
> Signed PGP part
> Hi all,
> 
> On 22/02/2019 12:29, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>>> I had to read this paragraph twice to understand it.
>>> The way it's written, it sounds like we're doing a bad thing.
>>> (Until I read the "security" section at the end of the proposal.)
>>> 
>>> Can you mention the positive aspects in the Abstract?
> 
> Rewritten this.
> 
>> Instead I'd go with a phrasing like,
>>  "Authorities will continue computing consensus package lines in the
>> consensus if the consensus method is between 19 and (N-1).  If the
>> consensus method is N or later, they omit these lines."
> 
> This sounds good too.
> 
> Updated draft is attached.

Thanks!

Looks good to me, let's merge it as an "accepted" proposal?

T
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/attachments/20190226/8539cb0c/attachment.sig>