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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1WXZ8B-0001Vp-Ge
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 08 Apr 2014 16:44:15 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.214.54 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.54; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
helo=mail-bk0-f54.google.com;
Received: from mail-bk0-f54.google.com ([209.85.214.54])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WXZ89-0004LR-OL
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 08 Apr 2014 16:44:15 +0000
Received: by mail-bk0-f54.google.com with SMTP id 6so791681bkj.27
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 08 Apr 2014 09:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.239.137 with SMTP id vs9mr120359lac.59.1396975447244;
Tue, 08 Apr 2014 09:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.89.68 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 09:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CADZB0_bqzoCT7XRgaoWBZLyfoFjWvLs8-YaP9AZ=sv7x_xJbpQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADZB0_bqzoCT7XRgaoWBZLyfoFjWvLs8-YaP9AZ=sv7x_xJbpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 09:44:07 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgThGNpu=0HEsX7rSKZzKOST2Ktci=ZjSw41JD0=Lo5Wug@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Angel Leon <gubatron@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
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
(gmaxwell[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
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: 1WXZ89-0004LR-OL
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] have there been complains about network
congestion? (router crashes, slow internet when running Bitcoin nodes)
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: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 16:44:15 -0000
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Angel Leon <gubatron@gmail.com> wrote:
> a home router that crashes or slows down when its NAT pin-hole table
> overflows, triggered by many TCP connections.
We don't form or need to form a great many connections.
> a home router that crashes or slows down by UDP traffic
We don't use UDP.
> a home DSL or cable modem having its send buffer filled up by outgoing data,
> and the buffer fits seconds worth of bytes. This adds seconds of delay on
> interactive traffic. For a web site that needs 10 round trips to load this
> may mean 10s of seconds of delay to load compared to without bittorrent.
> Skype or other delay sensitive applications would be affected even more.
>
> These are issues the bittorrent community faced and eventually solved
> brilliantly with uTP, which uses a congestion window algorithm that allows
Yes, TCP has a congestion window too, still sometimes some poorly
designed or configured routers suffer from buffer bloat.
> perhaps uTP could help greatly
Adding our own UDP network stack involving a ton of exposed code
sounds like a great way to gain inadvertent bugs or backdoors.
But there doesn't have to be and shouldn't just be one network
transport for Bitcoin. You can gateway to other protocols and run them
in parallel. I think it would be great for someone to go build an
alternative transport protocol to gateway to and see what useful
things they can accomplish.
|
