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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gavinandresen@gmail.com>) id 1SIM97-0003Vo-EF
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 12 Apr 2012 15:41:17 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 74.125.82.53 as permitted sender)
client-ip=74.125.82.53; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com;
helo=mail-wg0-f53.google.com;
Received: from mail-wg0-f53.google.com ([74.125.82.53])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1SIM91-0001NA-Vu
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 12 Apr 2012 15:41:17 +0000
Received: by wgbfm10 with SMTP id fm10so1945048wgb.10
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 12 Apr 2012 08:41:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.180.88.169 with SMTP id bh9mr7147918wib.5.1334245265872; Thu,
12 Apr 2012 08:41:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.223.88.208 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 08:41:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+XhJbpNYUyPm2Ymcpg3grbfGnfERCsUJNJuByEJbJLsMMmMbQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+XhJbpNYUyPm2Ymcpg3grbfGnfERCsUJNJuByEJbJLsMMmMbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 11:41:05 -0400
Message-ID: <CABsx9T029cY-OJfZ9n-rSZc7i36e+CkOZPZixdi8EFL7oN4jhQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: sirk390@gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
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
(gavinandresen[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: 1SIM91-0001NA-Vu
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Adding request/reply id in messages
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, 12 Apr 2012 15:41:17 -0000
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Christian Bodt <sirk390@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would like to discuss the following bitcoin protocol improvement propos=
al:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Adding request/reply id in all messages (in the messag=
e header,
> based on what was done for the "checksum" field)
That seems like a perfectly reasonable protocol improvement to me.
Anybody else have an opinion?
--=20
--
Gavin Andresen
|
