oskarth

https://github.com/vacp2p/rln-contract should also attribute where code is from in README, and if there are any changes to it.

cc @jm-clius thoughts on this one? Moving to icebox for now

> The underlying consensus algorithm is quite simple to implement. The acceptance criteria should mainly be that someone can implement it in a given language completely such that it yields...

While this is useful, is this something we need to specify now? As opposed to something that grows out empirical usage and experience.

fyi @staheri14

What's the state of this @adambabik and @decanus?

@adambabik @decanus Is this issue still relevant? Given discussion yesterday, can we update this issue?

6/WAKU1 spec not priority, PRs welcome though

Might be a good idea to distinguish this as two different use cases, a la SQS e.g.: 1. Standard Queues - x throughput (tps) - At-Least-Once Delivery - Best-Effort Ordering...

> I'm wondering if notarized timestamps would make sense. It could basically work in that each node that receives or stores a message appends a signed timestamp to the message....