Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFA69258 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 07:17:35 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-wm0-f44.google.com (mail-wm0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03A8D146 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 07:17:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f44.google.com with SMTP id v199so126703934wmv.0 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 00:17:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:message-id:date :references:in-reply-to:to; bh=3Veq63AexJ1jDQyNVce39VJNeOf9VUsD3BKepXRRwBI=; b=OhzfL7ilu9iX6IN5wM+1ywNFF1RO3zwu9Qp9mdO3h5OG7UDQ+Tgl9SngQlNMOE9PgL vn7aDGWeWMvW+bQQO0DudrXnedWxbEoBnH7rX3BdZp3wuszYM3/G3GdT+JVUmfZhIgT0 rt76dfSJDMSj68IFd4qYjquiJhZBsOj4L+LVLcNY/vBaSj/uxTJNzvbaqlxzxMJxEfvs ThjuI0My7zKThpZteS8KV2YBlR7bKen5z5TegudCcUxwooudfIQl3UV3l4WRW7ZSOK4y mLADHj7g5P1ViBn/CA+WLF1OmC7KNnoXtPNUDw78tIUlnKvHrcOi5EOZQiwVsYLXMa6D Ht8Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:to; bh=3Veq63AexJ1jDQyNVce39VJNeOf9VUsD3BKepXRRwBI=; b=WxX4bQUg2P2kBnTRd/kl+yJ/ZMH0Hy+UFPn1X0O5nB5F9+7pWwV6i/4XVw/SDahQJT CV/agu2f+zn60b1ljaHgb6MpxlRryHNDgno2r0EQlZXpGVjHXJ+pgC1BwM0nnjslRDDH Hvd4Vv62bOVgD7aKkRyI147azRlN6I1KQW6Kur6hbsOsG1X8ybKZDSmYoXXdZuYcK9mM Qyw0lQR5LtpMSe9KKU81xs2o0KutDL8pQTLILUnCIFFNc0hLXfergVgvS+GsM+b3G+ay BYrrhNr7iCJvIL/xw5FBCyfCEN/D2y1V/kNnLspqzEnUj7x14AXvQfe2dk94BpfjmOhs U8gA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKhYAfhIq/Papz2Otl7kcNUrP84dVSRp3cUFiTaDsKTXXbI1MC2kldj5eJ0h3PLcg== X-Received: by 10.194.172.102 with SMTP id bb6mr1518305wjc.151.1467098253310; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 00:17:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.114.7.23] ([41.33.219.249]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q203sm3543944wmd.24.2016.06.28.00.17.32 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 28 Jun 2016 00:17:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Eric Voskuil Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Message-Id: <1E86A00F-0609-4DBC-9543-94AE04CC13C9@voskuil.org> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 09:17:31 +0200 References: <87h9cecad5.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> In-Reply-To: <87h9cecad5.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13F69) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE, 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 Subject: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 151 X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 07:17:35 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 I haven't seen much discussion here on the rationale behind BIP 151. Apologi= es if I missed it. I'm trying to understand why libbitcoin (or any node) wou= ld want to support it. I understand the use, when coupled with a yet-to-be-devised identity system,= with Bloom filter features. Yet these features are client-server in nature.= Libbitcoin (for example) supports client-server features on an independent p= ort (and implements a variant of CurveCP for encryption and identity). My co= ncern arises with application of identity to the P2P protocol (excluding Blo= om filter features). It seems to me that the desire to secure against the weaknesses of BF is bei= ng casually generalized to the P2P network. That generalization may actually= weaken the security of the P2P protocol. One might consider the proper reso= lution is to move the BF features to a client-server protocol. The BIP does not make a case for other scenarios, or contemplate the signifi= cant problems associated with key distribution in any identity system. Given= that the BIP relies on identity, these considerations should be fully vette= d before heading down another blind alley. e -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: oPenGP 6.0 on iOS iQEVAwUBV3IkYjzYwH8LXOFOAQg+iggAkFShi/ibZXiVv3A3z1a1SMd+4ar0kiZk mCkBBZaatoW8tXVZmuv5xzLnj3ali9Y4jp/3h2nUJ1B4ov2kcB0kZIKE/a1DTFwb 4X3uSzgu0lEAqSZormOvt7Op46NPn6KJ+/wTtP4lUFU72lSd7qrVKMlCVc88VE7/ pMloKSc69nAeFIkyWbOUi/zDzefu/5tarfif85jumooYjPmAwJnkgiPCqpqBbuga 5lBdS1r47KK+SaDFl6Cbn4i/c6tBPLTnu+TR7TEKOW5vwVA7eUqb6SOK7pETWJGK 0Ii4ZWYt7MOPSEda381CMjWEwtsCNp0eI4GPZAAz+jNLo4G1+PAbaw=3D=3D =3DBalw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----