diff options
| author | Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> | 2012-08-13 11:07:55 -0400 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2012-08-13 15:08:10 +0000 |
| commit | c2349b111d75e70c1e18d43f9429295d37b3d3e1 (patch) | |
| tree | a5d9009666fbf8aeba92964c6ddf2109eb5bce6e | |
| parent | e2600c429f58a14d62a2ba11cba6e1070de07567 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-c2349b111d75e70c1e18d43f9429295d37b3d3e1.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-c2349b111d75e70c1e18d43f9429295d37b3d3e1.zip | |
Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP: Custom Services
| -rw-r--r-- | d2/cd22cc244eda69b8379af7dde973345d93e679 | 76 |
1 files changed, 76 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/d2/cd22cc244eda69b8379af7dde973345d93e679 b/d2/cd22cc244eda69b8379af7dde973345d93e679 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..acc83c2ad --- /dev/null +++ b/d2/cd22cc244eda69b8379af7dde973345d93e679 @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@ +Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] + helo=mx.sourceforge.net) + by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) + (envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1T0wFW-0007ip-DK + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:08:10 +0000 +Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com + designates 209.85.213.175 as permitted sender) + client-ip=209.85.213.175; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; + helo=mail-yx0-f175.google.com; +Received: from mail-yx0-f175.google.com ([209.85.213.175]) + by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) + (Exim 4.76) id 1T0wFU-0004LR-ND + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:08:10 +0000 +Received: by yenm1 with SMTP id m1so3234770yen.34 + for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; + Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:08:03 -0700 (PDT) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Received: by 10.50.202.73 with SMTP id kg9mr5884836igc.42.1344870475286; Mon, + 13 Aug 2012 08:07:55 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.64.77.168 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:07:55 -0700 (PDT) +In-Reply-To: <CA+8xBpfZzxBgqO6xT6+a_ACgYR=3cV9rmY_kmSovtT3dfjdhDg@mail.gmail.com> +References: <5028AFBE.8070104@justmoon.de> + <CA+8xBpfZzxBgqO6xT6+a_ACgYR=3cV9rmY_kmSovtT3dfjdhDg@mail.gmail.com> +Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 11:07:55 -0400 +Message-ID: <CAAS2fgSgE0fOetuJZDPVeEMxbDo91r0w3Hvvn4vDdChCH1zxdA@mail.gmail.com> +From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> +To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@exmulti.com> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) +X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. + See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. + -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for + sender-domain + 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider + (gmaxwell[at]gmail.com) + -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record + -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from + author's domain + 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, + not necessarily valid + -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature + 1.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list +X-Headers-End: 1T0wFU-0004LR-ND +Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net +Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP: Custom Services +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 +Precedence: list +List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:08:10 -0000 + +On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@exmulti.com> wrote: +> My only response is a weak one: inevitability. It seems likely that +> -somebody- will implement their own P2P commands for their own client +> subset, even if only a simple "use 'getstatus' with strSubVer matching +> /FooClient/" +> +> Therefore, if it is inevitable, we might as well make some basic rules +> about how to extended your P2P command set. + +I'm not opposed to that logic. But for cases where an introduction mechanism +will be needed... it would be awfully good to have one, and I do think that +there is harm in making people think that simple services negotiation will +actually work for their needs for cases where a separate p2p network is +needed. + + |