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
|
Return-Path: <tomh@thinlink.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D56CDBB6
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 30 Jun 2015 01:00:24 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com (mail-pa0-f41.google.com
[209.85.220.41])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EB6CE7
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 30 Jun 2015 01:00:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by paceq1 with SMTP id eq1so112789031pac.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 29 Jun 2015 18:00:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to
:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=gJ5qeC2G1Oybu6aJLxIyDi6BupG7WEVJq480zdApO6Y=;
b=fXHRwWdLGGa3bOWX1DBbcv9LF+k1nL/j4uGCqKNunEzu9xxAWbvAgqDkC3X9TNWWro
TTiBDhPHDgZQFXMIPixFoACJdIine86DeK6WfpmSylQrcab6jXBO7+KhOgA7UOGS454J
lTa1+LARe/0AYCT75gc29DeNtnXkg/nnmHJCyVl2qCkg4hYzBmQ5kNqYSRQSSb3e0EkO
eRRajt2xOItVt4jEdunmNo/vzU/BxUjBNaVJFobKDHJ/a9O8Iw6frhQNeoojlz9fabFM
YyWC6819HOCiZnumSDqUb7Nq/PT8Q9APuafW3gR7iVOo/OxzuDlubyhqpUUZoAKkOAKz
3HIQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlD/4SXR4eRIgpe6brQGAdH0brXEPyQ9mRioFMIoM5U+x02VUIJvNg6jIZqyh3m5TeUtKTl
X-Received: by 10.69.0.8 with SMTP id au8mr37697907pbd.112.1435626024348;
Mon, 29 Jun 2015 18:00:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.100.1.239] ([204.58.254.99])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id
oe10sm4248421pdb.19.2015.06.29.18.00.22
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Mon, 29 Jun 2015 18:00:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5591EA1B.1050709@thinlink.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 18:00:11 -0700
From: Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Natanael <natanael.l@gmail.com>
References: <20150629050726.GA502@savin.petertodd.org> <5591E10F.9000008@thinlink.com>
<CAAt2M1_yiN8ouaTdiyx8n8CkaT=e-pdUqqtde-bC32enqLfHog@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAt2M1_yiN8ouaTdiyx8n8CkaT=e-pdUqqtde-bC32enqLfHog@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP: Full Replace-by-Fee deployment schedule
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: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 01:00:24 -0000
On 6/29/2015 5:51 PM, Natanael wrote:
> What you ask to see implemented will trivially fall to a sybil attack.
> It isn't securable. It is running on the honor system exclusively. It
> will be attacked, it will fail, losses will be had, the attackers will
> walk away with embarrassingly large sums.
Oh please. Checking that a node does relay something is not much
different than banning it for relaying garbage.
It just happens to require that you have two nodes and coordinate them
somehow. I didn't offer a complete design, don't claim magical
properties, and certainly didn't mean to imply that nodes passing a test
could be trusted (as you suggest with your "accountable parties").
|
