Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <jameson.lopp@gmail.com>) id 1WX8lM-00006l-V4
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 07 Apr 2014 12:34:56 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.216.173 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.216.173; envelope-from=jameson.lopp@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-qc0-f173.google.com; 
Received: from mail-qc0-f173.google.com ([209.85.216.173])
	by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1WX8lM-00013U-9e
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 07 Apr 2014 12:34:56 +0000
Received: by mail-qc0-f173.google.com with SMTP id r5so6165557qcx.4
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Mon, 07 Apr 2014 05:34:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.229.54.201 with SMTP id r9mr33240024qcg.6.1396874090876;
	Mon, 07 Apr 2014 05:34:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.119.214] (BRONTO-SOFT.car1.Raleigh1.Level3.net.
	[4.59.160.2])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id u59sm22930081qga.8.2014.04.07.05.34.50
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
	(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
	Mon, 07 Apr 2014 05:34:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <53429B69.30008@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 08:34:49 -0400
From: Jameson Lopp <jameson.lopp@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
References: <CANEZrP2rgiQHpekEpFviJ22QsiV+s-F2pqosaZOA5WrRtJx5pg@mail.gmail.com>	<534297B8.4060506@gmail.com>
	<CAPg+sBhL+Lr_noM7hVB4w-tvX0LLK2bKbQTzAw=4WswyxNGboQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPg+sBhL+Lr_noM7hVB4w-tvX0LLK2bKbQTzAw=4WswyxNGboQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
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
	(jameson.lopp[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	-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
X-Headers-End: 1WX8lM-00013U-9e
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Why are we bleeding nodes?
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: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 12:34:57 -0000

On 04/07/2014 08:26 AM, Pieter Wuille wrote:
> In my opinion, the number of full nodes doesn't matter (as long as
> it's enough to satisfy demand by other nodes).

I agree, but if we don't quantify "demand" then we are practically blind. What is the plan? To wait until SPV clients start lagging / timing out because their requests cannot be handled by the nodes?

For all I know, the network would run just fine on 100 nodes. But not knowing really irks me as an engineer.

- Jameson