Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.216.175 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.216.175; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-qy0-f175.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP3Fh=Ffeh5PtcaL4QBKXUzkFYAar4031-wVZOVQOhngrw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANEZrP3Fh=Ffeh5PtcaL4QBKXUzkFYAar4031-wVZOVQOhngrw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2011 09:30:24 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgQdRP5bd02tR_L6_hWh+qEwXWOVH8KRcpuFiRvKwD5o1w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Adding a pong message to the protocol
Precedence: list

On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 8:04 AM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
> I haven't written a patch for this, I might do so if there's
> sufficient interest.
[snip]
> Thoughts?

I'd rather see effort spent on the root issues, e.g. having nodes
gauge their own suitability (working inbound port, reasonably current
block chain, etc) before becoming advertised listeners.

Or more importantly=E2=80=94 figuring some way of setting up network
simulations which could be used to actually _validate_ proposed
changes in this area.

I, or many other people, could spout endlessly about attractive
sounding network enhancements (e.g. move-to-front peer prioritization,
tweaks to peer selection, etc.) but it's all just arm waving without a
way to measure it, and the real network is far too slow to upgrade
(and important) to test things in situ while testnet is far too small
and unlike the real network for useful testing.