From @poing on Thu Sep 17 2015 07:51:14 GMT+0000 (UTC)
I noticed that altered files generate a new hash. Limiting the ability to modify content, all links to any new content will need to be updated.
With the exception of the mutability of the peerID namespace, is IPFS essentially a P2P from of WORM storage? Write Once/Read Many
The Freenet Project faced issue with the same type of immutability, resulting in multiple key types to point to updated/updateable content.
Copied from original issue: https://github.com/ipfs/faq/issues/43
From @jbenet on Thu Sep 17 2015 16:11:13 GMT+0000 (UTC)
Though today is just one per node, you’ll be able to have as many mutable keys as you want. Working in it.
—
Sent from Mailbox
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 3:51 AM, Brian LaVallee notifications@github.com
wrote:
I noticed that altered files generate a new hash. Limiting the ability to modify content, all links to any new content will need to be updated.
With the exception of the mutability of the peerID namespace, is IPFS essentially a P2P from of WORM storage? Write Once/Read Many
The Freenet Project faced issue with the same type of immutability, resulting in multiple key types to point to updated/updateable content.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
P2P WORM Storage? · Issue #43 · ipfs-inactive/faq · GitHub