Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DABED1A33 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 18:56:24 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-ob0-f170.google.com (mail-ob0-f170.google.com [209.85.214.170]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E5B1E5 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 18:56:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by obbbh8 with SMTP id bh8so65449232obb.0 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:56:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=bJDb1uFP2TRTV1rPYl+BXvVwrAvSu8ubJHO3FK8tf/U=; b=GerZ+xl2Q0yESHWoFlixGBZVt+rNjyWiaHnLXVJccQ/y/3HJTQxxveYUSETStNTXJN 9Q3IaxWdEj2LcC14XL7x3Y7fEUcqppERz77Hzn5/h8r4HWq39YbDgt7FCRPM1TLBNnRV ubKuxro4DX3Wo6pCiuTCtEBfEbFzhMy4RLEisSArDQRZSM2USfzc9Vtt/uJiPbRvNXoK INoYBVK3LwKkGsqC1Dd/yQuG+C2vH6F6uk4EZrZOQw4JewjQmk0TmzWJQUxz0U/W7dLF 6/Kfht4CSGIstvpj5yXt46Fu4nH5Vg4sEy1ftus+NRyDpmA8Cw5gvTFgiDmk1WWYe+WT cK6A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.43.105 with SMTP id v9mr767500oel.6.1443120983599; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:56:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.197.83 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:56:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <10E4880B-1B3F-40AF-88DD-65D152533DFC@petertodd.org> References: <10E4880B-1B3F-40AF-88DD-65D152533DFC@petertodd.org> Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 14:56:23 -0400 Message-ID: From: Suhas Daftuar To: Peter Todd Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2f316987324052082c960 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Suhas Daftuar via bitcoin-dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP Proposal] New "sendheaders" p2p message X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 18:56:25 -0000 --001a11c2f316987324052082c960 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I considered that as well, but it seemed to me that other software on the network (say, different wallet implementations) might prefer the option of being able to bump up their protocol version in the future to pick up some other change, without having to also opt-in to receiving headers-announcements for blocks. In particular, inv-based block announcements aren't going away (even in my implementation of headers announcements, there are some edge cases where the code would need to fall back to an inv announcement), so forcing all software on the network to upgrade to supporting headers announcements, whether now or in the future, seems too drastic -- I could imagine some software not being very concerned about optimizing block relay in this particular way. On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Peter Todd wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > > > On 24 September 2015 14:37:40 GMT-04:00, Suhas Daftuar via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 2:17 PM, Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev < > >bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > >> > >> Is there actually a requirement for the new message? New nodes could > >just > >> unilaterally switch to sending headers and current nodes would be > >> compatible. > >> > > > >I don't believe that unilaterally switching to headers announcements > >would > >work for all network participants -- both for users running older > >Bitcoin > >Core versions (anything before 0.10, which I believe all ignore headers > >messages) and for non-Bitcoin Core software that participates on the > >network (which may ignore headers messages too, I'm not sure what all > >is > >out there). > > You can enable the behaviour based on advertised p2p network version. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > iQE9BAEBCgAnIBxQZXRlciBUb2RkIDxwZXRlQHBldGVydG9kZC5vcmc+BQJWBEO5 > AAoJEMCF8hzn9Lncz4MH/3ztGWdFvMWWcwQsjIRH+eP6PH57WaEru1smmFYOmKrj > djdiRVdxfChxRqP3adO21RUKKchjl8DNjrFJHPFz75FSM0cDcD0QAGAHilVdnICE > LEIlTEoiIc0f1z9f/EJHSHPhiUXMnjpl/l7PYJFZV3Lt2Bl30yLsNnrp9qxjR30n > 3nykZjyRad4JSavdTP6Evd3qaqwGXNUWsdObXNI+WPKlrw6hczlhFDKQ7RC1FPQU > Rbgb21pavtqLUTwbBZGUisAAc94e2Gama1p3ioUFklbVtLTdw+FtxPgV/0ZS75OR > V9pCXIbg9VM6QY4+9gYnP635+qCkqAJ4tBsYGmsT8yA= > =cF4B > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --001a11c2f316987324052082c960 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I considered that as well, but it seemed to me that other = software on the network (say, different wallet implementations) might prefe= r the option of being able to bump up their protocol version in the future = to pick up some other change, without having to also opt-in to receiving he= aders-announcements for blocks.

In particular, inv-based= block announcements aren't going away (even in my implementation of he= aders announcements, there are some edge cases where the code would need to= fall back to an inv announcement), so forcing all software on the network = to upgrade to supporting headers announcements, whether now or in the futur= e, seems too drastic -- I could imagine some software not being very concer= ned about optimizing block relay in this particular way.

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at = 2:41 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512



On 24 September 2015 14:37:40 GMT-04:00, Suhas Daftuar via bitcoin-dev <= bitcoin-dev@lists.= linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 2:17 PM, Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev <
>bitcoin-dev@li= sts.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Is there actually a requirement for the new message?=C2=A0 New nod= es could
>just
>> unilaterally switch to sending headers and current nodes would be<= br> >> compatible.
>>
>
>I don't believe that unilaterally switching to headers announcement= s
>would
>work for all network participants -- both for users running older
>Bitcoin
>Core versions (anything before 0.10, which I believe all ignore headers=
>messages) and for non-Bitcoin Core software that participates on the >network (which may ignore headers messages too, I'm not sure what a= ll
>is
>out there).

You can enable the behaviour based on advertised p2p network version= .
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQE9BAEBCgAnIBxQZXRlciBUb2RkIDxwZXRlQHBldGVydG9kZC5vcmc+BQJWBEO5
AAoJEMCF8hzn9Lncz4MH/3ztGWdFvMWWcwQsjIRH+eP6PH57WaEru1smmFYOmKrj
djdiRVdxfChxRqP3adO21RUKKchjl8DNjrFJHPFz75FSM0cDcD0QAGAHilVdnICE
LEIlTEoiIc0f1z9f/EJHSHPhiUXMnjpl/l7PYJFZV3Lt2Bl30yLsNnrp9qxjR30n
3nykZjyRad4JSavdTP6Evd3qaqwGXNUWsdObXNI+WPKlrw6hczlhFDKQ7RC1FPQU
Rbgb21pavtqLUTwbBZGUisAAc94e2Gama1p3ioUFklbVtLTdw+FtxPgV/0ZS75OR
V9pCXIbg9VM6QY4+9gYnP635+qCkqAJ4tBsYGmsT8yA=3D
=3DcF4B
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--001a11c2f316987324052082c960--