From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 14:39:51 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.10.15-gentoo; KDE/4.10.5; x86_64; ; )
References: <274a1888-276c-4aa6-a818-68f548fbe0fa@me.com>
	<526B45DB.2030200@jerviss.org>
	<CANEZrP2dQT6Evgm0UwvSKdgVsSnb_VF6fovVo0n0eKDM5ARZpw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP2dQT6Evgm0UwvSKdgVsSnb_VF6fovVo0n0eKDM5ARZpw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201310271439.52983.luke@dashjr.org>
Cc: kjj <bitcoin-devel@jerviss.org>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Feedback requested: "reject" p2p message
Precedence: list

On Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:32:57 PM Mike Hearn wrote:
> Currently bitcoinj gets a small but steady stream of bug reports of the form
> "my transaction did not propagate". It's flaky because the library picks one
> peer to send the transaction to, and then watches it propagate across the
> network. But if that selected peer refuses the tx for whatever reason, that
> propagation never comes, and there's currently no timeout to make it retry
> with a different node.

Sounds like the real bug is "BitcoinJ relies on good/servant behaviour from 
other nodes". Don't assume your random node isn't hostile. Handling a peer 
that doesn't relay your transaction for any reason (including if they lie to 
you about having done so) should be expected behaviour.

Luke