Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECA79C0032 for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 18:29:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C794E4090E for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 18:29:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org C794E4090E Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dashjr.org header.i=@dashjr.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=zinan header.b=dxHVGIz0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.101 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3IJGWqbppLUi for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 18:29:47 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 00:09:03 by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org DD6EF40134 Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [192.3.11.21]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD6EF40134 for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 18:29:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.77.250] (unknown [12.151.133.18]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8EE0838AF3C4; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 18:20:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=dashjr.org; s=zinan; t=1677781241; bh=uJZmPwfc96ZtjragIfrcDbfNqpPp14VvbGNN6eGVmN8=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=dxHVGIz0UGmuohHmG2SlAYq4tW+8tYiz6HsxSIoToSD+QQpjivXXPdYPcwwhRf6XA ERXJ1mqE31izMDtDjyjdrfSCkSawILXq9aL/jwYQ8anMTJ9M9I4m5P6tevc1D8Dg22 4C/0z1mVvUV0eJD8UJp+q+JzaEPdZe8mOA2Al/7o= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 13:20:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.8.0 To: kcalvinalvin , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion References: Content-Language: en-US From: Luke Dashjr In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Using service bit 24 for utreexo signaling in testnet and signet X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2023 18:29:48 -0000 This sounds like something that should be written up as a BIP and use a normal service bit assignment...? Luke On 3/2/23 01:55, kcalvinalvin via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Hello all, > > Wanted to tell the mailing list that I'll be using service bit 24 (1 > << 24) to signal that nodes are Utreexo capable nodes on testnet and > signet as requested by the comment in protocol.h in > bitcoind (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/74981aa02d2b14ad1c0b82d1eb09cf3169eaa8ae/src/protocol.h#L295-L301). > There are plans to release binaries for the utreexo node > (github.com/utreexo/utreexod) in the next few months so that power > users can try it out. I have no plans to release binaries for mainnet > yet. > > Do let me know if someone else is using the same bit to signal for > something else and we can coordinate accordingly. > > Best, > Calvin > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev