-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In list.cypherpunks, jrochkin@cs.oberlin.edu writes:
At 3:12 PM 01/06/95, Russell Nelson wrote:
Why? Why wouldn't the FV remailers use settlements? At the end of the month, everyone settles accounts in re who gets what fraction of what. No logs are needed other than counters.
Oh, you're suggesting that I'd only actually pay the first remailer on my chain, and at the end of the month he'd pay some of the money I (and others) paid him to all of the other remailers his transacted with over the month? I hadn't thought of that, but now that I do, I can see several problems arising.
This might not be as much of a problem as you think. Given that there will likely be a mixture of free and pay remailers, and that a given message may chain through one or more of either type, why not place the stamp for each pay remailer inside the encrypted sub-packet which that mailer will receive? Think of each remailer as an independant post office. For each pay remailer, you need one stamp. Ideally, each stamp would be a bit less expensive, but since remailers don't need to share their revenue, that shouldn't be much problem. An intelligent chainer (Chain++, maybe?) could keep track of your postage and put the stamps in the proper inner envelopes. This would work best if all the pay remailers accepted a common brand of stamp. - -- Roy M. Silvernail [ ] roy@cybrspc.mn.org PGP public key available by mail echo /get /pub/pubkey.asc | mail file-request@cybrspc.mn.org These are, of course, my opinions (and my machines) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.1 iQCVAwUBLw3VrBvikii9febJAQFozwQAkYUBp9Uc5Lbmc4udL7hwTgBY9I+yfKdy wvW5xl4TeTeJLAS95yHOyiEKP/nVsjfknr4gx1mOrFZYOxkNRJa78YeQ8tDAVq7Y S1UQrYqHJAoi/AKdypufIaeu8iF/1pVbYLDdIbbQm3bxlUZHwciYJUvnneRjFbhA BJB+ruqzEMs= =CGFS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----