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
|
Return-Path: <dev@jonasschnelli.ch>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10FE3C002D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 3 Nov 2022 22:37:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D890C41869
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 3 Nov 2022 22:36:59 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org D890C41869
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id Z6hvzelbTjBb
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 3 Nov 2022 22:36:58 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: delayed 00:09:54 by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org A645641844
Received: from sokrates7.ch-meta.net (sokrates7.ch-meta.net [80.74.145.97])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A645641844
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 3 Nov 2022 22:36:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by
sokrates7.ch-meta.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 312C380403BA;
Thu, 3 Nov 2022 23:26:59 +0100 (CET)
Authentication-Results: sokrates.metanet.ch;
spf=pass (sender IP is 98.150.163.224) smtp.mailfrom=dev@jonasschnelli.ch
smtp.helo=smtpclient.apple
Received-SPF: pass (sokrates.metanet.ch: connection is authenticated)
From: Jonas Schnelli <dev@jonasschnelli.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\))
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2022 12:26:54 -1000
References: <56677685-619a-691f-d5bc-54b69fdb6ed2@bip324.com>
<zxv58iXZ73hf9ge8S0QLTanW-uLzaWjNtMHuKONP9hrqS5RhwitxzfVaMH8hbi3yImgNrKme3lCuDcHYKkpxEQHyGZZHJ8xtReOcnAx3o4g=@wuille.net>
<d4272a20-b2a7-4ad8-9b41-8ce2b7ce827d@murch.one>
To: Murch <murch@murch.one>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <d4272a20-b2a7-4ad8-9b41-8ce2b7ce827d@murch.one>
Message-Id: <87FFCF31-946A-44AE-8AAE-6FA3E6465C89@jonasschnelli.ch>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1)
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Refreshed BIP324
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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, 03 Nov 2022 22:37:00 -0000
> =46rom what I understand we'll have about 35 message types on the =
network with the addition of BIP324. 256 possible IDs sounds like plenty =
room to grow, but perhaps we can be a bit more conservative:
>=20
> We could use the first bit to signal a 2-byte message ID. That allows =
us to express 128 IDs with 1 byte, but if we need more, we get a total =
of 2^15 IDs across 2 bytes.
Could make sense.
There would be an alternative to preserve more 1 byte IDs on the cost of =
a (much) smaller 2 byte ID space:
Reserve the short ID 0xFF as an indication for a 2 bytes short ID =
(additional 256 short IDs with 2 bytes).
That could be done later outside BIP324.
The 0xFF approach would lead to approx. 207 unused 1 byte short IDs =
(while Murchs approach would give us approx. 79 unused 1 byte short =
IDs).
The signal bit two byte approach would however lead to ~32k more two =
byte message IDs.
The main (and only?) benefit of short IDs is bandwidth.
Short ID 1-12 are reserved for string based IDs and thus, new and rarely =
sent message types must not always use a short ID.
Maybe the BIP should state that only frequent sent messages should =
reserve a short ID, though, the BIP itself assigns short IDs to all(?) =
message types (including low frequent messages like SENDHEADERS).
Maybe exclude message types that expected to be only sent once from =
assigning a short ID?
/j=
|
