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
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1UpaHN-0007EB-LK
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 20 Jun 2013 08:31:41 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.219.46 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.219.46; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-oa0-f46.google.com;
Received: from mail-oa0-f46.google.com ([209.85.219.46])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1UpaHL-0005oO-Um
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 20 Jun 2013 08:31:41 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id h1so7623432oag.5
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 20 Jun 2013 01:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.145.167 with SMTP id sv7mr4080490oeb.56.1371717094452;
Thu, 20 Jun 2013 01:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.23.36 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 01:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <E9A1F9E4-0A9A-4B5F-98D2-585306EB99AA@bitsofproof.com>
References: <4DE0E45E-BB48-4DFF-9C86-ACBE312B3049@bitsofproof.com>
<CANEZrP1MVKSNU92UrQ36sPCN0LNLKrVRXnfVwEZKhgoBFXatBA@mail.gmail.com>
<E9A1F9E4-0A9A-4B5F-98D2-585306EB99AA@bitsofproof.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 10:31:34 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: I-Ue0Un7hYQ3PbIYVct5rBN6xeo
Message-ID: <CANEZrP1rK3z5LXd+q-SRd3pzP5QLoJSL=CMPviH4fFVGKWT69g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d94fb25b90504df91c6f4
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1UpaHL-0005oO-Um
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Missing fRelayTxes in version
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: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 08:31:41 -0000
--047d7b5d94fb25b90504df91c6f4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
You can't eliminate the complexity (yet), otherwise you wouldn't be able to
talk to old nodes. You'll have to wait until versions prior to a particular
version are hard-forked off and can be safely dropped at connect time.
That said the reason I'm being so grumpy about this is that compared to the
complexity in the rest of the system, this is such a trivial and minor
detail. It's hardly even worth thinking about. I mean, we have a scripting
language full of opcodes nobody ever figured out how to use and the
protocol uses a mixture of byte orders, so an optional field in the version
message is really not such a big deal :)
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com>wrot=
e:
> I agree that this can be deferred until there is an actual new field
> without any harm. But then remember to update the BIP37 too saying that i=
t
> is optional only if flag added in BIPXX is not present.
>
> Your argument is that this complexity is already there so why not preserv=
e
> it. I think eliminating complexity (that has no benefit) strengthens the
> system.
>
> *Tam=C3=A1s Blummer*
> http://bitsofproof.com
> <http://bitsofproof.com/>
>
> On 20.06.2013, at 09:36, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
>
> Sure but why not do that when there's an actual new field to add? Does
> anyone have a proposal for a feature that needs a new version field at th=
e
> moment? There's no point changing the protocol now unless there's actuall=
y
> a new field to add.
>
> Anyway I still don't see why anyone cares about this issue. The Bitcoin
> protocol does not and never has required that all messages have a fixed
> number of fields per version. Any parser written on the assumption it did
> was just buggy. Look at how tx messages are relayed for the most obvious
> example of that pattern in action - it's actually the raw byte stream
> that's stored and relayed to ensure that fields added in new versions
> aren't dropped during round-tripping. Old versions are supposed to preser=
ve
> fields from the future.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com>wro=
te:
>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> The issue with the current parser is that those fields are conditionally
>> optional on that there will be no subsequent fields added.
>> If there will be further fields they will become manadory.
>>
>> Why not bump the version and parse the fields as mandatory from then on?
>> This would be backward compatible and cleaner
>> going forward.
>>
>> Tamas Blummer
>> http://bitsofproof.com
>> <http://bitsofproof.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------=
------
>> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
>>
>> Build for Windows Store.
>>
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>>
>
>
--047d7b5d94fb25b90504df91c6f4
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">You can't eliminate the complexity (yet), otherwise yo=
u wouldn't be able to talk to old nodes. You'll have to wait until =
versions prior to a particular version are hard-forked off and can be safel=
y dropped at connect time.<div>
<br></div><div>That said the reason I'm being so grumpy about this is t=
hat compared to the complexity in the rest of the system, this is such a tr=
ivial and minor detail. It's hardly even worth thinking about. I mean, =
we have a scripting language full of opcodes nobody ever figured out how to=
use and the protocol uses a mixture of byte orders, so an optional field i=
n the version message is really not such a big deal :)</div>
</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu,=
Jun 20, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Tamas Blummer <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"m=
ailto:tamas@bitsofproof.com" target=3D"_blank">tamas@bitsofproof.com</a>>=
;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style=3D"word-wrap:break-word"><div><di=
v style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:normal;text-a=
lign:-webkit-auto;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;t=
ext-transform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:Helvetic=
a;word-spacing:0px">
<div style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:normal;tex=
t-align:left;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;text-t=
ransform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:Helvetica;wor=
d-spacing:0px">
I agree that this can be deferred until there is an actual new field withou=
t any harm. But then remember to update the BIP37 too saying that it is opt=
ional only if flag added in BIPXX is not present.</div><div style=3D"text-i=
ndent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:normal;text-align:left;font-st=
yle:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;text-transform:none;font-s=
ize:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:Helvetica;word-spacing:0px">
<br></div><div style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:=
normal;text-align:left;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:nor=
mal;text-transform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:Hel=
vetica;word-spacing:0px">
Your argument is that this complexity is already there so why not preserve =
it. I think eliminating=C2=A0complexity (that has no benefit) strengthens t=
he system.</div><div style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-va=
riant:normal;text-align:left;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-heig=
ht:normal;text-transform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-fami=
ly:Helvetica;word-spacing:0px">
<br></div><div style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:=
normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-he=
ight:normal;text-transform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-fa=
mily:Helvetica;word-spacing:0px">
<b>Tam=C3=A1s Blummer</b></div><div style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing=
:normal;font-variant:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;font-style:normal;font-=
weight:normal;line-height:normal;text-transform:none;font-size:medium;white=
-space:normal;font-family:Helvetica;word-spacing:0px">
<a href=3D"http://bitsofproof.com/" target=3D"_blank"><span><span style>htt=
p://bitsofproof.com</span></span></a></div></div><a href=3D"http://bitsofpr=
oof.com/" style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:medium;font-style:normal=
;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:n=
ormal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-spa=
ce:normal;word-spacing:0px" target=3D"_blank">
</a></div><div><div class=3D"h5"><br><div><div>On 20.06.2013, at 09:36, Mik=
e Hearn <<a href=3D"mailto:mike@plan99.net" target=3D"_blank">mike@plan9=
9.net</a>> wrote:</div><br><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div dir=3D"ltr">Su=
re but why not do that when there's an actual new field to add? Does an=
yone have a proposal for a feature that needs a new version field at the mo=
ment? There's no point changing the protocol now unless there's act=
ually a new field to add.<div>
<br></div><div>Anyway I still don't see why anyone cares about this iss=
ue. The Bitcoin protocol does not and never has required that all messages =
have a fixed number of fields per version. Any parser written on the assump=
tion it did was just buggy. Look at how tx messages are relayed for the mos=
t obvious example of that pattern in action - it's actually the raw byt=
e stream that's stored and relayed to ensure that fields added in new v=
ersions aren't dropped during round-tripping. Old versions are supposed=
to preserve fields from the future.</div>
<div><br></div></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail=
_quote">On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Tamas Blummer <span dir=3D"ltr">&l=
t;<a href=3D"mailto:tamas@bitsofproof.com" target=3D"_blank">tamas@bitsofpr=
oof.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style=3D"word-wrap:break-word"><div><di=
v style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:normal;text-a=
lign:-webkit-auto;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;t=
ext-transform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:Helvetic=
a;word-spacing:0px">
<div style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:normal;tex=
t-align:left;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;text-t=
ransform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:Helvetica;wor=
d-spacing:0px">
Hi Mike,</div><div style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-vari=
ant:normal;text-align:left;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height=
:normal;text-transform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-family=
:Helvetica;word-spacing:0px">
<br></div><div style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:=
normal;text-align:left;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:nor=
mal;text-transform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:Hel=
vetica;word-spacing:0px">
The issue with the current parser is that those fields are conditionally op=
tional on that there will be no subsequent fields added.</div><div style=3D=
"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:normal;text-align:left;=
font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;text-transform:none=
;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:Helvetica;word-spacing:0px=
">
If there will be further fields they will become manadory.=C2=A0</div><div =
style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:normal;text-ali=
gn:left;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;text-transf=
orm:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:Helvetica;word-spa=
cing:0px">
=C2=A0</div><div style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-varian=
t:normal;text-align:left;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:n=
ormal;text-transform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:H=
elvetica;word-spacing:0px">
Why not bump the version and parse the fields as mandatory=C2=A0from then o=
n? This would be backward compatible and cleaner</div><div style=3D"text-in=
dent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:normal;text-align:left;font-sty=
le:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;text-transform:none;font-si=
ze:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:Helvetica;word-spacing:0px">
going forward.</div><span><font color=3D"#888888"><div style=3D"text-indent=
:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:normal;text-align:left;font-style:n=
ormal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;text-transform:none;font-size:m=
edium;white-space:normal;font-family:Helvetica;word-spacing:0px">
<br></div><div style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:=
normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-he=
ight:normal;text-transform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-fa=
mily:Helvetica;word-spacing:0px">
<span>Tamas Blummer</span></div><div style=3D"text-indent:0px;letter-spacin=
g:normal;font-variant:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;font-style:normal;font=
-weight:normal;line-height:normal;text-transform:none;font-size:medium;whit=
e-space:normal;font-family:Helvetica;word-spacing:0px">
<span><span><a href=3D"http://bitsofproof.com/" target=3D"_blank">http://bi=
tsofproof.com</a></span></span></div></font></span></div><a href=3D"http://=
bitsofproof.com/" style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:medium;font-styl=
e:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-=
height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;w=
hite-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" target=3D"_blank">
</a></div><br></div><br>---------------------------------------------------=
---------------------------<br>
This <a href=3D"http://SF.net" target=3D"_blank">SF.net</a> email is sponso=
red by Windows:<br>
<br>
Build for Windows Store.<br>
<br>
<a href=3D"http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev" target=3D"_blank">http://p.=
sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev</a><br>_________________________________________=
______<br>
Bitcoin-development mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net" target=3D"_bla=
nk">Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development=
" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de=
velopment</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
--047d7b5d94fb25b90504df91c6f4--
|
