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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <witchspace81@gmail.com>) id 1Qf6GX-0007lu-PI
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 08 Jul 2011 08:18:25 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.161.175 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.161.175; envelope-from=witchspace81@gmail.com;
helo=mail-gx0-f175.google.com;
Received: from mail-gx0-f175.google.com ([209.85.161.175])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Qf6GW-0005rq-Tm
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 08 Jul 2011 08:18:25 +0000
Received: by gxk3 with SMTP id 3so911046gxk.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 08 Jul 2011 01:18:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.151.8.21 with SMTP id l21mr1690831ybi.186.1310113099541; Fri,
08 Jul 2011 01:18:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.151.150.15 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 01:18:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAJNQ0st3ygLHPtq8fa9ceivSC1DQ38Hv+AQRiaXw=aL2Jze33Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110707111557.GA5231@ulyssis.org> <4E16A567.6020309@justmoon.de>
<CAJNQ0st3ygLHPtq8fa9ceivSC1DQ38Hv+AQRiaXw=aL2Jze33Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 08:18:19 +0000
Message-ID: <CAJNQ0su6MVJ7cz2uQ4ftGPykvYxWH7J7rk5Q0Us6JWM6zoW02Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: John Smith <witchspace81@gmail.com>
To: Stefan Thomas <moon@justmoon.de>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd514cce9ebec04a78a795f
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
(witchspace81[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.1 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in
digit (witchspace81[at]gmail.com)
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-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: 1Qf6GW-0005rq-Tm
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Version bytes
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: Fri, 08 Jul 2011 08:18:25 -0000
--000e0cd514cce9ebec04a78a795f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sorry, that last message got broken off.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 6:36 AM, Stefan Thomas <moon@justmoon.de> wrote:
>
>> Hey Pieter,
>>
>> > Otherwise, we could reset testnet (not actually reset, just
>> > change its addresses a bit), and simply state odd=testnet, even=realnet.
>>
>> We could use the XOR hack for now and remove it the next time we reset
>> testnet. But I do think the 111 is baggage we want to get rid of. Using
>> the lsb as a simple flag is much cleaner.
>>
>
I agree it is cleaner, but I think breaking compatiblity with older address
(even testnet) is not a good idea right now. It is important to build an
image of stability and backward compatibility.
So I vote for the XOR 111 hack :)
JS
--000e0cd514cce9ebec04a78a795f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sorry, that last message got broken off.<br>
<br>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div><div class=
=3D"h5"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 6:36 AM, Stefan T=
homas <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:moon@justmoon.de" target=3D"_=
blank">moon@justmoon.de</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">Hey Pieter,<br>
<div><br>
> Otherwise, we could reset testnet (not actually reset, just<br>
> change its addresses a bit), and simply state odd=3Dtestnet, even=3Dre=
alnet.<br>
<br>
</div>We could use the XOR hack for now and remove it the next time we rese=
t<br>
testnet. But I do think the 111 is baggage we want to get rid of. Using<br>
the lsb as a simple flag is much cleaner.<br></blockquote></div></div></div=
></blockquote><div><br><br>
I agree it is cleaner, but I think breaking compatiblity with older address=
(even testnet) is not a good idea right now. It is important to build an i=
mage of stability and backward compatibility.<br><br>So I vote for the XOR =
111 hack :)<br>
<br>JS<br><br></div></div>
--000e0cd514cce9ebec04a78a795f--
|
