On 9 Mar 2016, at 05:33, Ann O'Nymous <ann.onymous@vfemail.net> wrote:

Tim Wilson-Brown - teor:
Hi Kate,

Aaron and others currently favour "open onion services".

What do you think?

I remain persuaded by Paul Syverson's arguments for using names that
reflect design. Design is unambiguous and reliably accurate, unless
there have been substantive coding or merging errors. Conversely,
functionality, usage and applicability by threat model are all
ephemeral. Bugs and unforseen vulnerabilities can make such names
inaccurate and misleading, or even ironic.

So what name(s) would you or Paul suggest based on the design in #17178 (otherwise known as Rendezvous Single Onion Services)?
I've tried to find out, but it's lost somewhere in the backlog.

Tim

Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP 968F094B

teor at blah dot im
OTR CAD08081 9755866D 89E2A06F E3558B7F B5A9D14F