Todd Pederzani wrote:

Fredrik Tolf wrote:

Instead, we absolutely need to standardize a specific hashing
algorithm. I suggest SHA1, but it doesn't really matter. It would be
good if everyone could agree soon, though.
 

[2004-01-15 14:44] <sandos> someone care to mention to the mlist that TTHs are already semi-standard (well, in my small DC world atleast)

Yes, Tiger Tree Hashes have been part of BCDC for several months now.

why lock it to a single hash algorithm? you can't know the hash of the file you're looking to unless you have downloaded a *.sfv (what algorithm? is it called sfv, or?) or MD5 (or simlar) file telling it. Or if someone told you. and it's not for certain that all the hashing are the same type. I think it's better to have some keycodes for wellknown hashtypes so that it can be given by the client searching and extracted by the client matching.
If one can't get the hash of a file using a specific algorithm, he can't use the feature. Instead try to search on the hash he has.

But of course we can encourage use of a specific hashing algorithm, but I dont think we should explicitly use one.