Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <pete@petertodd.org>) id 1VAMRZ-0003HX-Ud
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 16 Aug 2013 16:00:05 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
	designates 62.13.149.78 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=62.13.149.78; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
	helo=outmail149078.authsmtp.net; 
Received: from outmail149078.authsmtp.net ([62.13.149.78])
	by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	id 1VAMRY-0001A2-Ru for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 16 Aug 2013 16:00:05 +0000
Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235])
	by punt8.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/Kp) with ESMTP id
	r7GFxuak015529; Fri, 16 Aug 2013 16:59:56 +0100 (BST)
Received: from petertodd.org (petertodd.org [174.129.28.249])
	(authenticated bits=128)
	by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id r7GFxpdM015255
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
	Fri, 16 Aug 2013 16:59:54 +0100 (BST)
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 11:59:51 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Message-ID: <20130816155951.GA16813@petertodd.org>
References: <CABsx9T32q8mKgtmsaZgh7nuhHY5cExeW=FiadzXq3jXVP=NBTw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP0PEcP339MKRyrHXHCCsP3BxRHT-ZfKRQ7G2Ou+15CD7A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP3LAR0erjgmTHruLwPNDdx-OVyb9KK52E6UnmE4ZuBrvQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20130816140116.GB16201@petertodd.org>
	<20130816141536.GD16201@petertodd.org>
	<CAEz79PoK9u9ffJ5jR8yXk8eCFP0Ytk_bno0mpcpM24mt-GGg5w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP3hHh3k5+ePGbqVeyo3oV=RTy36FA+8MbOZXg3yMqRxAw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20130816145912.GA16533@petertodd.org>
	<CANEZrP3wzMi3oWcwCt-GEs1cXdNa0mzvso_d3htJxaahiewaYw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="82I3+IH0IqGh5yIs"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP3wzMi3oWcwCt-GEs1cXdNa0mzvso_d3htJxaahiewaYw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: e44af920-068c-11e3-b5c5-002590a15da7
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
	http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
	aQdMdwQUGUATAgsB AmUbWlJeVVR7XGc7 ag1VcwRfa1RMVxto
	VEFWR1pVCwQmQxt2 cFZeBmRydgBEfXs+ ZENlXngVCUB+JBB0
	QE5JFWsONnphaTUc TRJdJAZJcANIexZF O1F6ACIKLwdSbGoL
	NQ4vNDcwO3BTJTpY RgYVKF8UXXNDMTci RhZNBn03GlYZAn11
	flQaDXI7VEIQKVl0 dx1J
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 174.129.28.249/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
	anti-virus system.
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 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
X-Headers-End: 1VAMRY-0001A2-Ru
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Gavin's post-0.9 TODO list...
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: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 16:00:06 -0000


--82I3+IH0IqGh5yIs
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 05:11:35PM +0200, Mike Hearn wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
>=20
> > UPNP seems to work well for the reference client. What's the situation
> > there on Android?
> >
>=20
> Not sure - it could be investigated. I think UPNP is an entirely
> userspace-implementable protocol, so in theory it could be done by a
> userspace library (even libminiupnp - java is not a requirement on androi=
d)

Do find out.

> > I leave my phone plugged in and connected via wifi for most of the day;
> > lots of people do that.
> >
>=20
> I suspect you mean "I think lots of people do that". I'm not so sure. We
> could potentially run an experiment in the Android app to measure how many
> users are in a position to contribute back, but just because you have wifi
> doesn't mean you can reconfigure it using UPnP. That helps a lot in home
> networks, but at the office it doesn't help.

Also worth finding out.

> I'm wary of a ton of work being put in to achieve not very much here.
> Satoshi's original vision was always that millions of users were supported
> by 100,000 or so nodes. I don't think that's unreasonable over the long
> term.

Appeal to authority.

Stop bringing up Satoshi's "vision" - our understanding of
crypto-currencies has improved in the 4.5 years since Bitcoin was
released. Satoshi didn't even forsee pool mining, which says a lot about
his economic judgement.

> Besides, prioritisation isn't very hard. Nodes can just hand clients a
> signed timestamp which they remember. When re-connecting, the signed
> timestamp is handed back to the node and it gives priority to those with
> old timestamps. No state is required on the node side. Signing and checki=
ng
> can be passed onto the general ECDSA thread pool that works its way throu=
gh
> pending signature operations, they'd be prioritised lower than checking
> blocks/broadcasts.

Right, so you're giving priority to peers that have been around for
awhile. You've succeeded in forcing attackers to wait a bit.

A) What's the definition of a peer? What stops me from pretending to be
100 peers?

B) Given an attacker willing to wait, what's your plan?

--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000004a52a297d9ae8ecde2ba62b681cc5a4cfbf7636032fc78e7d0

--82I3+IH0IqGh5yIs
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlIOTHcACgkQpEFN739thoz7gQCcCOvhEPAOUn6wAs/VPGu702s6
vFgAn3wRRl/bLKrpJOqSr/VGpyvMxFWq
=38Pt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--82I3+IH0IqGh5yIs--