summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/ec/b25702b70828b0a515bce736dbc816b4f4deb4
blob: 177e683f76472d079c9622506bd211e032acc630 (plain)
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
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <SRS0=2GaZs2hg=4A=jerviss.org=kjj@jerviss.org>)
	id 1R4BUe-0002SS-LL for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Thu, 15 Sep 2011 12:56:40 +0000
X-ACL-Warn: 
Received: from serv.jerviss.org ([12.47.47.47] helo=inana.jerviss.org)
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1R4BUd-0005K5-TP
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Thu, 15 Sep 2011 12:56:40 +0000
Received: from [156.99.25.142] ([156.99.25.142])
	(username: kjj authenticated by PLAIN symmetric_key_bits=0)
	by inana.jerviss.org (8.13.6/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p8FCuOjG017619
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Thu, 15 Sep 2011 07:56:29 -0500
Message-ID: <4E71F5F8.2020807@jerviss.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 07:56:24 -0500
From: kjj <kjj@jerviss.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1;
	rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 SeaMonkey/2.3.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org>
References: <CABsx9T2MKTYCeOqERXKBMYEqNEK4eo9jGt81gZE1=Fv=s3wEqA@mail.gmail.com>
	<201109142206.40455.luke@dashjr.org>
In-Reply-To: <201109142206.40455.luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass (inana.jerviss.org: 156.99.25.142 is authenticated by a
	trusted mechanism)
X-Spam-Score: -1.8 (-)
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
	-0.5 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
	domain 0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1R4BUd-0005K5-TP
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Request review: drop misbehaving peers
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, 15 Sep 2011 12:56:40 -0000

Luke-Jr wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:57:00 PM Gavin Andresen wrote:
>> I'm looking for review of this pull request:
>>    https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/517
> "Non-standard" transactions, or those with "insufficient" fees should not be
> penalised. These are properly relay/miner policy decisions, not protocol
> violations, and should be made more easily configurable, not punished for
> configuration.
>
>
A few non-standard transactions are probably legitimate.  A whole bunch 
of them are probably not.  I would think that assigning a point or two 
of badness to a peer sending one is pretty reasonable, with the 
understanding that we would need to adjust that as the network evolves.