"network disruption as a service" and proof of local storage

In this context, Matt asserts that the goal is to prove digital copies of a public file and nothing more or less. Regarding IP, Sergio suggests that machines that want to be prioritized in some way or rewarded for hosting a node should use a fixed IP, as it is the cost of prioritization/reward. The protocol could be a service bit advertised in the version message. In response to Jeremy Spilman's comment about achieving a reliable mechanism for discerning a local copy exists under these constraints, Sergio says that he sees it differently. The asymmetric-time protocol can be made to have almost no false positives/false negatives, not considering rare communication problems such as congestion and packet loss for more than 5 seconds. He explains his calculations which suggest that the protocol works with a security margin of approximately 50x and a communication problem during 5 seconds would be needed to disturb a protocol that takes 100 msec for the prover.