Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1QW2w6-0006oo-Cs for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 08:55:54 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.216.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.216.47; envelope-from=decker.christian@gmail.com; helo=mail-qw0-f47.google.com; Received: from mail-qw0-f47.google.com ([209.85.216.47]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1QW2w1-0006o5-MJ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 08:55:54 +0000 Received: by qwh5 with SMTP id 5so2766781qwh.34 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 01:55:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.114.77 with SMTP id d13mr3545970qcq.219.1307955344199; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 01:55:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.247.6 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 01:55:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Christian Decker Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 10:55:04 +0200 Message-ID: To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd6aa44ac4f1404a5941521 X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) 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 freemail (decker.christian[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -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 0.0 RFC_ABUSE_POST Both abuse and postmaster missing on sender domain 0.0 T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Headers-End: 1QW2w1-0006o5-MJ Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Bootstrapping via BitTorrent trackers X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 08:55:54 -0000 --000e0cd6aa44ac4f1404a5941521 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi all. Just wanted to carry the discussion from the Forum over to the dev-list. We have quite a few bootstrapping mechanisms, starting with the overly complex (IMHO) IRC bootstrapping, which is often suspected as bot-activity. Then we have a few hardcoded nodes and some fallback nodes. I was wondering why we didn't adopt BitTorrent tracker bootstrapping until now? It's basically all it does. Given a hash (SHA1 hash of the genesis bloc would be nice ^^) it gives you a list of other nodes with the same hash. Given that there are quite a few open trackers (accepting and tracking any hash you throw at them) we could just decide to use 2-3 of those to bootstrap. The downside would be that they return bencoded data, which has to be interpreted first, but it's easier than implementing the IRC stuff, I think. Any comments? Regards, Chris --000e0cd6aa44ac4f1404a5941521 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all.

Just wanted to carry the discussion from the Forum over to t= he dev-list.

We have quite a few bootstrapping mechanisms, starting = with the overly complex (IMHO) IRC bootstrapping, which is often suspected = as bot-activity. Then we have a few hardcoded nodes and some fallback nodes= . I was wondering why we didn't adopt BitTorrent tracker bootstrapping = until now? It's basically all it does. Given a hash (SHA1 hash of the g= enesis bloc would be nice ^^) it gives you a list of other nodes with the s= ame hash.

Given that there are quite a few open trackers (accepting and tracking = any hash you throw at them) we could just decide to use 2-3 of those to boo= tstrap.

The downside would be that they return bencoded data, which = has to be interpreted first, but it's easier than implementing the IRC = stuff, I think.

Any comments?

Regards,
Chris
--000e0cd6aa44ac4f1404a5941521--