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

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, Iain.