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 ) id 1S7Wj7-0003zG-7P for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:45:41 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([173.242.112.54]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1S7Wj4-0006mn-5A for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:45:41 +0000 Received: from ishibashi.localnet (fl-184-4-164-217.dhcp.embarqhsd.net [184.4.164.217]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EF2525605B2 for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:45:28 +0000 (UTC) From: "Luke-Jr" To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:45:08 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.2.2-gentoo; KDE/4.7.4; x86_64; ; ) References: In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: CE5A D56A 36CC 69FA E7D2 3558 665F C11D D53E 9583 X-PGP-Key-ID: 665FC11DD53E9583 X-PGP-Keyserver: x-hkp://subkeys.pgp.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201203131445.09552.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1S7Wj4-0006mn-5A Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Adding a pong message X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:45:41 -0000 On Tuesday, March 13, 2012 2:06:38 PM Mike Hearn wrote: > https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/932 adds a "pong" message that > echoes back a 64 bit nonce contained in the ping, if the protocol > version is new enough. > > The goal of this is to make it easier for clients, especially mobile > clients, to quickly check if a connection is stale, and also to see if > a remote node is overloaded so we can avoid talking to it. A common > case where this happens is if the remote node is itself downloading > the block chain or doing something equally intensive. > > Any objections? Not really an objection per se, but what's wrong with TCP keepalives?