1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pete@petertodd.org>) id 1YN2ao-0003Ju-MD
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 15 Feb 2015 17:02:50 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
designates 62.13.149.43 as permitted sender)
client-ip=62.13.149.43; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
helo=outmail149043.authsmtp.co.uk;
Received: from outmail149043.authsmtp.co.uk ([62.13.149.43])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1YN2an-0006lJ-6c for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 15 Feb 2015 17:02:50 +0000
Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235])
by punt17.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t1FH2Yh6065275;
Sun, 15 Feb 2015 17:02:34 GMT
Received: from savin.petertodd.org (75-119-251-161.dsl.teksavvy.com
[75.119.251.161]) (authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t1FH2TKs063676
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Sun, 15 Feb 2015 17:02:32 GMT
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 12:02:29 -0500
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com>
Message-ID: <20150215170228.GB21269@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <CABm2gDqM6q24tPEBKSHbbVQu-mvfV37PNc4hD=VjyRHk2jujZw@mail.gmail.com>
<54D0414F.6030806@voskuil.org>
<CABm2gDo_sYjNWU6EEsKmOXt5uUu87Lj1oFzqio79MxSx2SYrNg@mail.gmail.com>
<54DE7601.4070509@voskuil.org>
<CABm2gDpt60B=Sf_2X9xt4fPH7x4fff7K4h36XfosHigV5tP+4Q@mail.gmail.com>
<54DF07A5.1060004@voskuil.org>
<CABm2gDoS+XOR7Ugt91kNWNdvwsb1_Zb-aO0sma_Xps2Sx-0N5g@mail.gmail.com>
<54DF2E80.5060506@voskuil.org>
<20150214131320.GA26731@savin.petertodd.org>
<3D4F2E23-CADE-4FE7-B960-3F79815E868C@bitsofproof.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ADZbWkCsHQ7r3kzd"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3D4F2E23-CADE-4FE7-B960-3F79815E868C@bitsofproof.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: 6ea5dc10-b534-11e4-b396-002590a15da7
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aQdMdwcUHlAWAgsB AmMbWlNeUF97WmE7 bA9PbARUfEhLXhtr
VklWR1pVCwQmRR13 fhx6KVpycQZAf3g+ ZE9rX3YVWhErcBIu
Q05JR2gFYXphaTUb TRJbfgVJcANIexZF O1F6ACIKLwdSbGoL
NQ4vNDcwO3BTJTpY RgYVKF8UXXNDOTh0 fR0dBzQzHEsKDw8y
MxchK1hUXFkYKQ0I PAlpanYZORUTFgZZ Hkd4YmdiLkUGXCoq
RQheXEMYDG8VQDwU C1UmJQVLSiRbQTYQ XA0cE1kXDDheUSNM RWEcOgAA
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 75.119.251.161/587
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: 1YN2an-0006lJ-6c
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>,
libbitcoin@lists.dyne.org
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] On Rewriting Bitcoin (was Re:
[Libbitcoin] Satoshi client: is a fork past 0.10 possible?)
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: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 17:02:50 -0000
--ADZbWkCsHQ7r3kzd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 03:23:47PM +0100, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> Peter,
>=20
> You did not address me but libbitcoin. Since our story and your evaluatio=
n is probably similar, I chime in.
>=20
> On Feb 14, 2015, at 2:13 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
>=20
> > So stop wasting your time. Help get the consensus critical code out of
> > Bitcoin Core and into a stand-alone libconsensus library,
>=20
>=20
> We have seen that the consensus critical code practically extends to Berk=
ley DB limits or OpenSSL laxness, therefore
> it is inconceivable that a consensus library is not the same as Bitcoin C=
ore, less its P2P service rules, wallet and RPC server.
Wallet and RPC server are definitely not consensus critical code.
P2P service rules are weakly consensus critical, in that a failure to
relay valid blocks can in practice cause a loss of consensus. But
relaying valid blocks is very easy, and you only need sone relay
mechanism out of many to work for consensus to be maintained.
OpenSSL is getting replaced by libsecp256k1, a library designed for
consensus-critical applications.
As for databases, look at the good #bitcoin-wizards discussion yesterday
for strategies to make databases less relevant to consensus.
> On Feb 14, 2015, at 2:13 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
> >=20
> > Or you can be stereotypical programmers and dick around on github for
> > the next ten years chasing stupid consensus bugs in code no-one uses.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> The Core code base is unfriendly to feature extensions because of its cri=
ticality, legacy design and ancient technology. It is also a commodity
> that the ecosystem takes for granted and free.=20
Are you referring to feature extensions to consensus critical code -
like my own CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY? - or extensions to code that isn't
consensus critical?
> I honestly admire the core team that works and progresses within these li=
mits and perception.
>=20
> I am not willing to work within the core=E2=80=99s legacy technology limi=
ts. Does it mean I am dicking around? I think not.
> It was my way to go down the rabbit hole by re-digging it and I created s=
uccessful commercial products on the way.
Yes you are dicking around. The effort you're going to spend recreating
the core consensus code and getting it right is orders of magnitude more
work than figuring out how to use the foreign function interface in your
chosen language, or at worse, just running Bitcoin Core to do validation
and using RPC or the p2p protocol locally to track that state.
Don't assume your prior experience with other commercial projects has
any bearing on Bitcoin: consensus-critical crypto is a brand new field
within software engineering with very unique requirements, pioneered by
Bitcoin itself.
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
00000000000000000a37c901cf2ae6c281f47b237e9bf1d7268fb561b4332345
--ADZbWkCsHQ7r3kzd
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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==
=b3NW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--ADZbWkCsHQ7r3kzd--
|
