Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Vb1zS-0006bY-W3 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 05:37:19 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.212.176 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.176; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com; helo=mail-wi0-f176.google.com; Received: from mail-wi0-f176.google.com ([209.85.212.176]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Vb1zS-0001dw-5B for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 05:37:18 +0000 Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id ex4so2262456wid.9 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 22:37:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.101.134 with SMTP id fg6mr11955340wib.9.1383025031947; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 22:37:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.156.163 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 22:37:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <274a1888-276c-4aa6-a818-68f548fbe0fa@me.com> <9DCDB8F6-E3B2-426B-A41E-087E66B3821A@gmail.com> <526B45DB.2030200@jerviss.org> <526DD18A.7060201@jerviss.org> Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:37:11 +1000 Message-ID: From: Gavin Andresen To: Gregory Maxwell Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04462e56beaf4404e9da9b0b X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: github.com] -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 (gavinandresen[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 X-Headers-End: 1Vb1zS-0001dw-5B Cc: Bitcoin Development , Andreas Schildbach Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Feedback requested: "reject" p2p message 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: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 05:37:19 -0000 --f46d04462e56beaf4404e9da9b0b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Thanks for the feedback, everybody, gist updated: https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/7079034 Categories are: 0x01-0x0fProtocol syntax errors0x10-0x1fProtocol semantic errors0x40-0x4fServer policy rule RE: why not a varint: because we're never ever going to run out of reject codes. Eight are defined right now, if we ever defined eight more I'd be surprised. RE: why not use HTTP codes directly: because we'd be fitting round pegs into square holes. -- -- Gavin Andresen --f46d04462e56beaf4404e9da9b0b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks for the feedback, everybody, gist up= dated:

= Categories are:

0x01-0x0f Protocol syntax errors
0x10-0x1f Protocol semantic errors
0x40-0x4fServer policy rule


RE: w= hy not a varint: =A0because we're never ever going to run out of reject= codes. =A0Eight are defined right now, if we ever defined eight more I'= ;d be surprised.

RE: why not= use HTTP codes directly: because we'd be fitting round pegs into squar= e holes.

--
--
Gavin Andresen
--f46d04462e56beaf4404e9da9b0b--