MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: gmaxwell@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <E1313B4E-6061-49CA-9E8C-E5FD468531C0@jonasschnelli.ch>
References: <E1313B4E-6061-49CA-9E8C-E5FD468531C0@jonasschnelli.ch>
From: Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph.org>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 02:22:15 +0000
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgR7hpVE+G7NZWMfSd_2JF76_PT8FC51QQjS1gfq0YfEYw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Schnelli <dev@jonasschnelli.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED service bits
Precedence: list

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 3:13 PM, Jonas Schnelli via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Currently, pruned peers have no way how to signal their (valuable) service.
> A BIP proposal to improve this (draft):
> https://github.com/jonasschnelli/bips/wiki/NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED-BIP-DRAFT

The instructions for relay addresses should not instruct you to relay
these addresses but rather that you should relay addresses you would
connect to, under the generalized assumption that if it is useful to
you it will be useful to others.

This avoids instructing someone who might not consider
non-node-network peers useful from being directed by the BIP to relay
things that they don't find useful. (In particular, it means that the
obvious implementation of just throwing out the 'useless' information
works fine.)  I think would better reflect what people are likely to
actually do.