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
|
Return-Path: <tier.nolan@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEE531602
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 24 Sep 2015 18:17:51 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-vk0-f53.google.com (mail-vk0-f53.google.com
[209.85.213.53])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70B862E8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 24 Sep 2015 18:17:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by vkgd64 with SMTP id d64so42237624vkg.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:17:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc
:content-type; bh=RNtCMqgjrvLaGRW8kywd2DcVnYlFNlZATgJCEdtCbdY=;
b=O5tY5fdEx145UeXqgF8MvClIxq0GLPTicyMRbhfn9FzO/DtmTSlcL/3dgYI8MJeje9
cVwJ7f7Ewa1OViO4KtgXNiXMAUaH2w3i7Yt8ak/e3yHHQIRdHK/FYItLFerRdFq/Eg23
i5RET4C1MY42H/UWNZrlAsVVION1A2uI0V4LHbTkM3aaPUhXamtuA161BlkXfAMDpviy
VWPSw3YB1U9k/Cptwwq6YNYxvBn9C2clajOymuCGScJE3BzAGZy5ao94Prjr1wo5bMAZ
zsaz0frKwqofL46hrWWOjHc0juYboGCt5AoZ8M52BUo7V02G52YB4kWwNeHE6bjNlR2m
wLVg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.31.5.205 with SMTP id 196mr581794vkf.88.1443118670559; Thu,
24 Sep 2015 11:17:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.103.65.204 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:17:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAFp6fsHBbyVo21DnQKGBVJ7P=8NqOGJ-jv0-MH9WaBD6vauudA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFp6fsHBbyVo21DnQKGBVJ7P=8NqOGJ-jv0-MH9WaBD6vauudA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 19:17:50 +0100
Message-ID: <CAE-z3OUKTKh5-SHkiawr4R58Fdg9N6_1PLjW19YsF-K9OOjQow@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tier Nolan <tier.nolan@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1143dda0ba41da0520823fe2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,MISSING_HEADERS,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP Proposal] New "sendheaders" p2p message
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 18:17:52 -0000
--001a1143dda0ba41da0520823fe2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Suhas Daftuar via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm proposing the addition of a new, optional p2p message to help improve
> the way blocks are announced on the network. The draft BIP is available
> here and pasted below:
> https://gist.github.com/sdaftuar/465bf008f0a4768c0def
>
> The goal of this p2p message is to facilitate nodes being able to
> optionally announce blocks with headers messages rather than with inv's,
> which is particularly beneficial since the introduction of headers-first
> download in Bitcoin Core 0.10. In particular, this allows for more
> efficient propagation of reorgs as it would eliminate a round trip in
> network communication.
>
Is there actually a requirement for the new message? New nodes could just
unilaterally switch to sending headers and current nodes would be
compatible.
It looks like the only DOS misbehaving penalty is if the header is invalid
or if the headers don't form a chain.
--001a1143dda0ba41da0520823fe2
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On T=
hu, Sep 24, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Suhas Daftuar via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr=
"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_b=
lank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><block=
quote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc=
solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">Hi,<div><br></div><div>I'm pr=
oposing the addition of a new, optional p2p message to help improve the way=
blocks are announced on the network.=C2=A0 The draft BIP is available here=
and pasted below:</div><div><div><a href=3D"https://gist.github.com/sdaftu=
ar/465bf008f0a4768c0def" target=3D"_blank">https://gist.github.com/sdaftuar=
/465bf008f0a4768c0def</a></div></div><div><br></div><div>The goal of this p=
2p message is to facilitate nodes being able to optionally announce blocks =
with headers messages rather than with inv's, which is particularly ben=
eficial since the introduction of headers-first download in Bitcoin Core 0.=
10.=C2=A0 In particular, this allows for more efficient propagation of reor=
gs as it would eliminate a round trip in network communication.</div></div>=
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Is there actually a requirement for the ne=
w message?=C2=A0 New nodes could just unilaterally switch to sending header=
s and current nodes would be compatible.<br><br></div><div>It looks like th=
e only DOS misbehaving penalty is if the header is invalid or if the header=
s don't form a chain.<br></div></div></div></div>
--001a1143dda0ba41da0520823fe2--
|
