Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <bo.bjornsen@gmail.com>) id 1WmMcd-0001IM-2C
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 19 May 2014 12:24:51 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.215.51 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.215.51; envelope-from=bo.bjornsen@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-la0-f51.google.com; 
Received: from mail-la0-f51.google.com ([209.85.215.51])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1WmMcb-0002ee-Vp
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 19 May 2014 12:24:51 +0000
Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id gf5so3984703lab.38
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Mon, 19 May 2014 05:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.112.55.5 with SMTP id n5mr1571063lbp.71.1400502283384;
	Mon, 19 May 2014 05:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.17.3.20] ([109.247.232.34])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id q8sm17624575lbr.28.2014.05.19.05.24.39
	for <multiple recipients>
	(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
	Mon, 19 May 2014 05:24:40 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5379F803.40509@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 14:24:35 +0200
From: =?UTF-8?B?QmrDuHJuIMOYaXZpbmQgQmrDuHJuc2Vu?=
 <bo.bjornsen@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
References: <CA+8=xu+GPykmKdAjxLdRA3QoCPR8azervT9uO-GVraNowAb49g@mail.gmail.com>	<5379CE4D.5040100@gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP28PQNwuLYTgzyaTDUY-Sg2fEijiPZ26k3NbwvgYoqLww@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP28PQNwuLYTgzyaTDUY-Sg2fEijiPZ26k3NbwvgYoqLww@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature";
	boundary="oD5ql5LqSacGrNnReReFGb4kcAh255fjc"
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
	(bo.bjornsen[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: 1WmMcb-0002ee-Vp
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] About the small number of bitcoin 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, 19 May 2014 12:24:51 -0000

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--oD5ql5LqSacGrNnReReFGb4kcAh255fjc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 19/05/14 14:15, Mike Hearn wrote:
>     As an interested party not intimately familiar with the bitcoin cod=
ebase
>     who also spent some time setting up a node a while ago, I would lik=
e to
>     add one thing to the above list - network rate limiting.
>=20
>=20
> The problem is that this is easier said than done. Bitcoin Core won't
> notice a remote peer is working but slow and switch to a faster one, an=
d
> even if it did, it'd just mean throttling your connection would cause
> all remote nodes to give up and hit the other unthrottled peers even mo=
re.
>=20

Does this mean that you can currently actively hurt the network by
adding a node with a very slow upstream / downstream? If so, what is the
recommended minimum amount of bandwidth you should allocate for a node?
I've already throttled mine with QoS based on the script in the contrib/
folder.

Bj=C3=B8rn =C3=98ivind



--oD5ql5LqSacGrNnReReFGb4kcAh255fjc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJTefgHAAoJEL7WgfZSg+BMy0sP/30U2ce28L251PMEc2pC+qLP
VvQftjQcuhvvoTdmelwRsXXk70sc6oJ8ovJmJ1GantmWfM5WXcdrkRemOc9vPKFC
iMDQu3pW0TcR12nDsPK+DI60t/Otaika6kUgNZ072IhsOccYf6gOQyXwM1nGgQsJ
nka6zYZiSvHUQoI9HqFK/+Ueg24a/+qNPtakbk1JbRTXumnvccP6Yg4nH/yLOQx/
GZjQ6yd4PxZIb2uHm7LrHUMwKQrvfr7NxvNHUN0rDA2Dmv/AlH57LdaQmpJj1EOX
Vtez442qXG4ygrnbG41azMbBqUjF/Szovn3WOkV3h4qem4HpsVcintlfJJFALTGW
5twkqEY35WpjGlP/9LwqlX2hugzEOt8Y+D0vsmJumjImHFWL8u0M+NKdTXt5hHYR
w7h3gZ3iFUm0RfeeniRxyCyPcEDLuCulbzxS505NcahSZnYBdJLhAT7at1YumaWm
8RO/xkuZgauMDY3EyM8pJBimTJvq5PgcmWQrcf0Cv67i9MBtAf3JhSOZtKuFLI4y
6qKT8NILjpqtxI2lHwnxfHoTIfqB1wFuM3MYCsRP9jTeUCCiL+gdtQBs5q0XV+GF
6nJGHQaBfWUf4Kfv2XQuXnwBknKHbxBsLMpmheTLaPA9vx4NUYgwhKJH3jMdnAM5
eJPHPXDHYwKaQpwhGeYW
=gf/W
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--oD5ql5LqSacGrNnReReFGb4kcAh255fjc--