Subject: Re: Two Different Routes to the Same Node, One with Via

From: John Goerzen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 18:03:09 -0600

On Wed, Dec 15 2021, Sergey Matveev wrote:

> *** Koushik Roy [2021-12-12 22:58]:
>>This would be a cool feature, but how would you be able to enforce "max
>>delivery" across multiple neighbors?
>
> I have got the same question. We have to keep the state of number of
> deliveries per area message. There is also always race: probably you
> connect to Baz a second earlier than to a Bar directly. What to do if
> caller connects to both Baz and Bar -- should it "lock" encrypted packet
> transmission because it want to send it at most once? What if
> transmission is interrupted: for example you begin sending packet to
> Bar, but then you go outside LAN and only Baz (via WAN) will be
> accessible for a long time. Should the packet be in "locked" state?
> Moreover hypothethical locks depend on encrypted packet's content
> (decrypted area message), leaking some knowledge that it is some kind of
> special. There are too many questions, and hardly they are easy to
> answer with confidence. All of that smells like huge complication :-)

You may be right.  If the "max delivery" were also 1 on the
receiving end, it would know it received it from 1 node and then not
pass it on, right?

But you are right to raise those questions about partial delivery and
such.  In my scenario, that wouldn't happen, but there's nothing about
the tooling to prevent it, indeed.

John