Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2023 15:22:30 +0000
To: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>
From: Pieter Wuille <bitcoin-dev@wuille.net>
Message-ID: <1zGcFRzB9Has9bXWlYaOXXnOy9jxwLJvhkL_46OlA8JRsx2ultkYweDdPnW3Tbf145byXb8cG8pimWBT0qBBDaKisufJufP2wssDtigKass=@wuille.net>
In-Reply-To: <Y/K3Ejkwlj4NIMMa@erisian.com.au>
References: <56677685-619a-691f-d5bc-54b69fdb6ed2@bip324.com>
 <Y3dBUXPhTskCx+Fu@erisian.com.au>
 <gSxFQedPc72pTioi9vuxvLKpaRBsnKFL4gkPKPn2G-EJgz_2Y1pYQ7cHD5SnunyCaLln7UQEHIxnopqP74LlnK__Mf9BURbJW8B5MYTZvCU=@wuille.net>
 <Y7dZctMlZtH6PEsz@erisian.com.au> <Y7vMGVQz8TjS4Cad@erisian.com.au>
 <6b83c32e-59ca-65ef-2553-d66f8d117e56@bip324.com>
 <Y++id6mXsscfxduH@erisian.com.au>
 <S1zoL4CCIDVTrjmXx2JtYhO2qjgGyNIAP6X9FXRCRKPDjoQj20VcqKFCYkmmPQkNuMyNf9zp6GFVWWC7l8dBzCogUqvzmDx9D811NPheNJ8=@wuille.net>
 <Y/K3Ejkwlj4NIMMa@erisian.com.au>
Feedback-ID: 19463299:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
 Dhruv M <dhruv@bip324.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Refreshed BIP324
Precedence: list

On Sunday, February 19th, 2023 at 6:56 PM, Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au=
> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 10:13:05PM +0000, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev w=
rote:
>=20
> > > I think it's probably less complex to close some of the doors?
> > > 2) are short ids available/meaningful to send prior to VERACK being
> > > completed?
> > > Ah, I hadn't considered this nuance. If we don't care about them bein=
g available before VERACK negotiation, then it may be possible to introduce=
 a way to negotiate a different short id mapping table without needing a me=
chanism for re-negotiating.
>=20
> I think you still need/want two negotiation steps -- once to tell each
> other what tables you know about, once to choose a mutually recognised
> table and specify any additions.

Right, I wasn't talking about how many steps/messages the negotiation takes=
. I just meant that if all negotiation of the mapping table happens just on=
ce (before VERACK) and that negotiation itself happens without use of short=
 commands, then there is no need for re-negotiating short commands after th=
ey are already in use. Nothing concrete, but I can imagine that that may si=
mplify some implementations.

Cheers,

--=20
Pieter