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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jgarzik@exmulti.com>) id 1SJRCS-0002XD-PG
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 15 Apr 2012 15:17:12 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from mail-vb0-f47.google.com ([209.85.212.47])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1SJRCP-0005X0-UP
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 15 Apr 2012 15:17:12 +0000
Received: by vbbfr13 with SMTP id fr13so4506407vbb.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sun, 15 Apr 2012 08:17:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=google.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state;
bh=KGtMaIf8XJ3w72uCBtDRGYcHqWJj2+ILRPQks9n4F20=;
b=JXTepu0dG955psXYue/8WAG6in8Fj2Fka2GdPepOQuQ0xcyQRRbeO75KE3cJC4yXqm
BCDveDywbizUGWjMHw8RYcg8fbW0LSuA11oSY/q6wCSAibookulnAH/A1GdVJ/sEBDOJ
ppzOekdVKL9oIQDFwXxHtlhzy7XQWMRNj4z9UURWW+L8ydPjBFacWfDcFihAa1Cr98Qq
bA/kS7TbkHXNzBIIPz2fMG4guPr/h4MRGFZCquyNPjQEo0y3akyMgSwoeZzYAF8IdvKH
zV5nELRVrT+SsyI424zVjEE/X/Gn4H6iejNe6FeZxPs26kKL8K0A5mORdU/+9JDa+pQ7
1X0Q==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.31.3 with SMTP id w3mr4361116vcc.21.1334503024413; Sun, 15
Apr 2012 08:17:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.109.33 with HTTP; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 08:17:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [99.43.178.25]
In-Reply-To: <CAGQP0AGbLYZYwKGb0AHOPx3BadBQ399A67ntEo98mpm=kKgZ+g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+8xBpc5CZ9Sx4MwPdeS0-5frnV9B+mJ5OwcPoUVrygTawiJBg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGQP0AGbLYZYwKGb0AHOPx3BadBQ399A67ntEo98mpm=kKgZ+g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:17:04 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+8xBpehkZZaJEEnxH0_gzz5n=LNCvDBMS0uD3ErW1p-=uaE6Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@exmulti.com>
To: jtimonmv@gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnKj1cNMo5d/4H0Z92otRhA14+37d5zbUUXAkK7cbYO6N5tLMXJXIMX69Qv9GvQHtImDbyV
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
X-Headers-End: 1SJRCP-0005X0-UP
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin TX fill-or-kill deterministic
behavior
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 Apr 2012 15:17:12 -0000
2012/4/15 Jorge Tim=F3n <timon.elviejo@gmail.com>:
> On 4/12/12, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@exmulti.com> wrote:
>> 1. =A0N =3D 1 or 2 or whatever the community prefers. =A0Ideally enough =
time
>> for a third-tier miner, mining strange TXs, finds a block.
>> 2. =A0H1 =3D height of block chain, when a TX is received
>> 3. =A0H2 =3D H1 + (144 * N)
>> 4. =A0If block chain height reaches H2, and TX has not made it into a
>> block, drop TX from memory pool
>
> Why not just adding a field expiration_block =3D H2?
> It seems more explicit and flexible than using a 144 * N constant.
> You're changing the protocol anyway, right?
No, not changing the protocol.
Further, adding a field to TX would imply the client needed to rewrite
the TX for each retransmit, changing the hash. Not good at all.
> Another question, aren't different peers going to get different H1 for
> the same tx?
Typically no, because 99.9% of TX's make it throughout the network in
seconds. But yes it is possible, just like it is possible today to
receive a TX at various times.
--=20
Jeff Garzik
exMULTI, Inc.
jgarzik@exmulti.com
|
