Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <theymos@mm.st>) id 1R8Jl2-0006NM-Ds
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 26 Sep 2011 22:34:40 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of mm.st
	designates 66.111.4.28 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=66.111.4.28; envelope-from=theymos@mm.st;
	helo=out4.smtp.messagingengine.com; 
Received: from out4.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1R8Jl1-0002aM-GN
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 26 Sep 2011 22:34:40 +0000
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.43])
	by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id E68252AA87
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Mon, 26 Sep 2011 18:34:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from web3.nyi.mail.srv.osa ([10.202.2.213])
	by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 26 Sep 2011 18:34:33 -0400
Received: by web3.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix, from userid 99)
	id C3BA5554CBE; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 18:34:33 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <1317076473.3335.140258148029217@webmail.messagingengine.com>
X-Sasl-Enc: dXMI6M/VCWmYKTU69HRs3wAGTPYzamOF0+z8+wlNtbNx 1317076473
From: "theymos" <theymos@mm.st>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
References: <201109261517.11245.luke@dashjr.org><201109261655.59768.luke@dashjr.org><CABsx9T0TN+Nzzjod7xNJk4PNHnWPMWZUVsTHP3Yxq0C_-EgBLQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<201109261753.25549.luke@dashjr.org>
In-Reply-To: <201109261753.25549.luke@dashjr.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 17:34:33 -0500
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
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
	(theymos[at]mm.st)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	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 T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL To: misformatted and free email service
X-Headers-End: 1R8Jl1-0002aM-GN
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Newly introduced DoS
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, 26 Sep 2011 22:34:40 -0000

On Monday, September 26, 2011 5:53 PM, "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
> It's not future. It's presently allowed in blocks. Which means it's
> perfectly valid to relay (and also perfectly value to NOT relay or
> accept). Ergo, shouldn't be punished.

Yeah, my node has always relayed these transactions. The limit seems
pointless to me, especially when it's per kB: people will just add
more data.

The coinbase maturity DoS limit should not have a chance of immediately
kicking the node, as I believe this could happen normally in rare cases.
Rejecting these transactions is also pretty cheap, AFAIK. A small DoS
score seems reasonable, though.