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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gronager@ceptacle.com>) id 1Vkrta-0002K0-64
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 25 Nov 2013 08:51:54 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from 2508ds5-oebr.1.fullrate.dk ([90.184.5.129]
helo=mail.ceptacle.com)
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1VkrtX-0006rf-U0 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 25 Nov 2013 08:51:53 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mail.ceptacle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 400C7376C3D9
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 25 Nov 2013 09:51:46 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ceptacle.com
Received: from mail.ceptacle.com ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (server.ceptacle.private [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new,
port 10024) with ESMTP id xt7rR-hjdMrA
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 25 Nov 2013 09:51:45 +0100 (CET)
Received: from MacGronager.local (cpe.xe-3-1-0-415.bynqe10.dk.customer.tdc.net
[188.180.67.254])
by mail.ceptacle.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B3F8376C3BD
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 25 Nov 2013 09:51:45 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <52930FA3.3070802@ceptacle.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 09:51:47 +0100
From: Michael Gronager <gronager@ceptacle.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9;
rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
References: <CALxbBHWwQXjjET+-GFTKNFPd_yWPjEWGvS-YwUPL+z86J8sw0Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgQxBVOT1ceWWttH5e2wG7-qJ3LxKKnFBEqLwbz-OwDo3g@mail.gmail.com>
<CALxbBHX9PACKFJM_-=0Hm7hO7Km7jnLNRk=pRcKYTAcPD4G5qg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALxbBHX9PACKFJM_-=0Hm7hO7Km7jnLNRk=pRcKYTAcPD4G5qg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information. [URIs: doubleclick.net]
X-Headers-End: 1VkrtX-0006rf-U0
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Network propagation speeds
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: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 08:51:54 -0000
Hi Christian,
Cool - thanks for posting - agree, that it would be nice to normalize
the results with block size - so divide by size and:
1. see if there is a correlation (we all presume there still is)
2. plot the delay graph as e.g. normalized to the averaged blocksize or
lets define a "standard block size" of 200kb or what ever so we can
compare the plot btw days.
Also, does the correlation of propagation times hold for transaction
sizes as well (would be ice to find the logical t0 and the constant - I
guess the interesting measure is not kb but signatures, so number of
inputs - some correlation with size though).
Best,
Michael
On 24/11/13, 17:37 , Christian Decker wrote:
> Sure thing, I'm looking for a good way to publish these measurements,
> but I haven't found a good option yet. They are rather large in size,
> so I'd rather not serve them along with the website as it hasn't got
> the capacity. Any suggestions? If the demand is not huge I could
> provide them on a per user basis.
> --
> Christian Decker
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Christian Decker
>> <decker.christian@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Since this came up again during the discussion of the Cornell paper I
>>> thought I'd dig up my measurement code from the Information
>>> Propagation paper and automate it as much as possible.
>>
>> Could you publish the block ids and timestamp sets for each block?
>>
>> It would be useful in correlating propagation information against
>> block characteristics.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
> Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
> Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight and game-changing
> conversations that shape the rapidly evolving mobile landscape. Sign up now.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63431311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
|
