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
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <shadders.del@gmail.com>) id 1R1g9O-0001nP-TH
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 08 Sep 2011 15:04:22 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.212.53 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.212.53; envelope-from=shadders.del@gmail.com;
helo=mail-vw0-f53.google.com;
Received: from mail-vw0-f53.google.com ([209.85.212.53])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1R1g9N-0004s1-Ra
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 08 Sep 2011 15:04:22 +0000
Received: by vws13 with SMTP id 13so55942vws.12
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 08 Sep 2011 08:04:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.98.137 with SMTP id ei9mr64350vdb.72.1315494256214;
Thu, 08 Sep 2011 08:04:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.1.1.50] (155.88-67-202.dynamic.dsl.syd.iprimus.net.au
[202.67.88.155])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id bd20sm2782490vdc.8.2011.09.08.08.04.13
(version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 08 Sep 2011 08:04:15 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4E68D968.1080604@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 01:04:08 +1000
From: Steve <shadders.del@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
rv:1.9.2.21) Gecko/20110831 Thunderbird/3.1.13
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: David Perry <enmaku@gmail.com>
References: <CAK5y1FhQLWXtqHfB3HymOkZ-5LdTqdEkX8bM=nOGhFeZrOPwgA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAK5y1FhQLWXtqHfB3HymOkZ-5LdTqdEkX8bM=nOGhFeZrOPwgA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------010805000404030409010000"
X-Spam-Score: -0.9 (/)
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
(shadders.del[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-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
-0.3 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1R1g9N-0004s1-Ra
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Alert System
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: shadders.del@gmail.com
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, 08 Sep 2011 15:04:23 -0000
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------010805000404030409010000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I think there's a significant risk to not having it at this stage.
There's many reasons why an urgent update may been to rapidly propagated
in this stage of the network's lifecycle. Perhaps if there's a
perceived threat of abuse the protocol could be altered slightly so it
can't carry content. Only a notification of the fact that there is an
alert. Then it would be up to individual clients whether they react to
it or not. The main clients would probably check a central trusted
server for actual alert content. This would give a lot more flexibility
in how to deal with the alert. Alert content servers could for example
implement a json api to provide alert content with meta data like target
client version, priority etc.
I think it should be removed in the future but not for a good while yet.
On 09/09/11 00:42, David Perry wrote:
> There has been some discussion on the new Bitcoin StackExchange
> <http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com> site lately about the alert
> protocol. A few have suggested that it might carry the potential for
> abuse (spam/DoS) and others have argued that it's merely deprecated.
> In any case, enough have voiced concerns that I've forked
> bitcoin/bitcoin, removed the snippet of code from main.cpp that makes
> the questionable call and submitted a pull request
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/506>. On that pull request it
> was noted by Gavin Andresen that it merited discussion here and some
> kind of consensus should be reached before acting on that pull
> request. It was also mentioned that he thought the feature was still
> more useful than dangerous and that he would argue against.
>
> So I pose the question to you fine fellows: Is the alert system
> valuable, an unnecessary risk or merely a snippet of deprecated code?
> Should it be removed?
>
> Sources:
> http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/583/what-is-the-alert-system-in-the-bitcoin-protocol-how-does-it-work/590
> http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/636/is-the-alert-system-still-in-the-main-clients-code-will-it-be-removed/711
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop
> What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses
> from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops
> provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable
> virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
--------------010805000404030409010000
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
I think there's a significant risk to not having it at this stage.
There's many reasons why an urgent update may been to rapidly
propagated in this stage of the network's lifecycle. Perhaps if
there's a perceived threat of abuse the protocol could be altered
slightly so it can't carry content. Only a notification of the fact
that there is an alert. Then it would be up to individual clients
whether they react to it or not. The main clients would probably
check a central trusted server for actual alert content. This would
give a lot more flexibility in how to deal with the alert. Alert
content servers could for example implement a json api to provide
alert content with meta data like target client version, priority
etc. <br>
<br>
I think it should be removed in the future but not for a good while
yet.<br>
<br>
On 09/09/11 00:42, David Perry wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK5y1FhQLWXtqHfB3HymOkZ-5LdTqdEkX8bM=nOGhFeZrOPwgA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">There has been some discussion on the new <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com">Bitcoin
StackExchange</a> site lately about the alert protocol. A few
have suggested that it might carry the potential for abuse
(spam/DoS) and others have argued that it's merely deprecated. In
any case, enough have voiced concerns that I've forked
bitcoin/bitcoin, removed the snippet of code from main.cpp that
makes the questionable call and submitted a <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/506">pull request</a>.
On that pull request it was noted by Gavin Andresen that it
merited discussion here and some kind of consensus should be
reached before acting on that pull request. It was also mentioned
that he thought the feature was still more useful than dangerous
and that he would argue against.
<div>
<br>
</div>
<div>So I pose the question to you fine fellows: Is the alert
system valuable, an unnecessary risk or merely a snippet of
deprecated code? Should it be removed?<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sources:</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/583/what-is-the-alert-system-in-the-bitcoin-protocol-how-does-it-work/590">http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/583/what-is-the-alert-system-in-the-bitcoin-protocol-how-does-it-work/590</a></div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/636/is-the-alert-system-still-in-the-main-clients-code-will-it-be-removed/711">http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/636/is-the-alert-system-still-in-the-main-clients-code-will-it-be-removed/711</a></div>
</div>
<pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop
What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses
from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops
provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable
virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/</pre>
<pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--------------010805000404030409010000--
|
