summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorEric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>2015-08-24 18:15:39 +0000
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2015-08-24 18:15:49 +0000
commita4deb7f791c3463c0c7a3be32cabc3be0ecc85d6 (patch)
tree3adaba3c340edff9755e36f91d1a0239c2add6a5
parent4f483f49f9bf5f16104d0ff1c50d32b3c8f0a939 (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-a4deb7f791c3463c0c7a3be32cabc3be0ecc85d6.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-a4deb7f791c3463c0c7a3be32cabc3be0ecc85d6.zip
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Revisiting NODE_BLOOM: Proposed BIP
-rw-r--r--30/c52a26f3e493e9493e333e85ffcaf3d16fca38151
1 files changed, 151 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/30/c52a26f3e493e9493e333e85ffcaf3d16fca38 b/30/c52a26f3e493e9493e333e85ffcaf3d16fca38
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..0cbadde09
--- /dev/null
+++ b/30/c52a26f3e493e9493e333e85ffcaf3d16fca38
@@ -0,0 +1,151 @@
+Return-Path: <elombrozo@gmail.com>
+Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
+ [172.17.192.35])
+ by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B300A9CA
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Mon, 24 Aug 2015 18:15:49 +0000 (UTC)
+X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
+Received: from mail-ig0-f174.google.com (mail-ig0-f174.google.com
+ [209.85.213.174])
+ by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4811B1B7
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Mon, 24 Aug 2015 18:15:49 +0000 (UTC)
+Received: by igfj19 with SMTP id j19so62576306igf.1
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Mon, 24 Aug 2015 11:15:48 -0700 (PDT)
+DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
+ h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
+ :cc:content-type;
+ bh=xxrGbEJfX69+YDTCvCuoTaxGsjUqWbpylQvtmZlCwWI=;
+ b=lAhQ1EB1mrMH7Tm5bGHIpHWcAwUo8wGiAuSoN22HkW/hjelUqAswWHSunr81VHo8DJ
+ iTZq9iuFKyoLRlaOUhkNYqLHkwkgtN8lrVXbGHcAJcv+I3NS2ZXuAgzTvTGBR0n3iuA9
+ bYmDzdIAtVIVJwRNnfzjUYHREcjEImPap48op2D/bDhLerIcSxAz+wqDSLXak/wskUCc
+ bh/aWtjnf2AS6TCvd9Wo5V26GKRg8Y0tLiWkFpF6u5z9saKyDuaggoluj74OsWhny+Ua
+ jRgwGBKN/2jpOZEYCU6NpJR/Sm8oyiVc6D6KMCpOAoRrJrHCbkUOBODj99hZZnnXPT+V
+ YbLw==
+X-Received: by 10.50.153.112 with SMTP id vf16mr16213891igb.79.1440440148723;
+ Mon, 24 Aug 2015 11:15:48 -0700 (PDT)
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+References: <55D6AD19.10305@mattcorallo.com>
+ <20150824152955.GA6924@amethyst.visucore.com>
+ <55DB566F.1010702@mattcorallo.com> <20150824180044.GA5729@muck>
+ <55DB5D49.4050800@mattcorallo.com>
+In-Reply-To: <55DB5D49.4050800@mattcorallo.com>
+From: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
+Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 18:15:39 +0000
+Message-ID: <CABr1YTceCUPSwUe9M2zUSXcB1qvtmq5PP6=ZBzaw19=VgO79GQ@mail.gmail.com>
+To: Matt Corallo <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com>, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
+Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01536c1062914e051e129b5e
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
+ DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
+ autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
+X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
+ smtp1.linux-foundation.org
+Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Revisiting NODE_BLOOM: Proposed BIP
+X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
+Precedence: list
+List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
+List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
+List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
+List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
+X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 18:15:49 -0000
+
+--089e01536c1062914e051e129b5e
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
+
+It would be very useful to not only be able to switch filtering on and off
+globally...but to be able to switch on a per-connection basis. But then
+again, perhaps it would be smarter to ditch the whole bloom filter thing in
+favor of an actual client/server architecture with proper authentication
+and access controls.
+
+The RPC was supposed to be this client/server architecture...but in
+practice it sucks so bad for doing anything beyond administering a node
+instance you fully control yourself that I eschewed it entirely in my
+wallet design.
+
+On Mon, Aug 24, 2015, 11:07 AM Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev <
+bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
+
+> BIP 111 was assigned, pull request (with the proposed changes) available
+> at https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/183
+>
+> Matt
+>
+> On 08/24/15 18:00, Peter Todd wrote:
+> > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 05:37:51PM +0000, Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev
+> wrote:
+> >> Its more of a statement of "in the future, we expect things to happen
+> >> which would make this an interesting thing to do, so we state here that
+> >> it is not against spec to do so". Could reword it as "NODE_BLOOM is
+> >> distinct from NODE_NETWORK, and it is legal to advertise NODE_BLOOM but
+> >> not NODE_NETWORK (though there is little reason to do so now, some
+> >> proposals may make this more useful in the future)"?
+> >
+> > ACK
+> >
+> _______________________________________________
+> bitcoin-dev mailing list
+> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
+>
+
+--089e01536c1062914e051e129b5e
+Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+
+<p dir=3D"ltr">It would be very useful to not only be able to switch filter=
+ing on and off globally...but to be able to switch on a per-connection basi=
+s. But then again, perhaps it would be smarter to ditch the whole bloom fil=
+ter thing in favor of an actual client/server architecture with proper auth=
+entication and access controls.</p>
+<p dir=3D"ltr">The RPC was supposed to be this client/server architecture..=
+.but in practice it sucks so bad for doing anything beyond administering a =
+node instance you fully control yourself that I eschewed it entirely in my =
+wallet design.<br>
+</p>
+<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Mon, Aug 24, 2015, 11:07=
+ AM=C2=A0Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lis=
+ts.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote=
+:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;bor=
+der-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">BIP 111 was assigned, pull reques=
+t (with the proposed changes) available<br>
+at <a href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/183" rel=3D"noreferrer" =
+target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/183</a><br>
+<br>
+Matt<br>
+<br>
+On 08/24/15 18:00, Peter Todd wrote:<br>
+&gt; On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 05:37:51PM +0000, Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev=
+ wrote:<br>
+&gt;&gt; Its more of a statement of &quot;in the future, we expect things t=
+o happen<br>
+&gt;&gt; which would make this an interesting thing to do, so we state here=
+ that<br>
+&gt;&gt; it is not against spec to do so&quot;. Could reword it as &quot;NO=
+DE_BLOOM is<br>
+&gt;&gt; distinct from NODE_NETWORK, and it is legal to advertise NODE_BLOO=
+M but<br>
+&gt;&gt; not NODE_NETWORK (though there is little reason to do so now, some=
+<br>
+&gt;&gt; proposals may make this more useful in the future)&quot;?<br>
+&gt;<br>
+&gt; ACK<br>
+&gt;<br>
+_______________________________________________<br>
+bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
+<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
+bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
+<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
+rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
+man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
+</blockquote></div>
+
+--089e01536c1062914e051e129b5e--
+