Date: Wed, 03 May 2017 22:03:43 +0000
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgQYhi3oqncrNU+26E4JoHHfQMJAyTGtJY-ZD6J9O7NPsQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJowKg+snAUjbCFkTybNqiJCy=d_M3s5k376y1B=rVqD8WCOXA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgQYhi3oqncrNU+26E4JoHHfQMJAyTGtJY-ZD6J9O7NPsQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph.org>,
	Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>
From: Matt Corallo <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com>
Message-ID: <AC8BC70A-D20E-4480-8414-49E2AF159423@mattcorallo.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Full node "tip" function
Precedence: list

If we ever have a problem getting blocks, we could consider adding somethin=
g to pay to receive historical blocks but luckily that isn't a problem we h=
ave today - the available connection slots and bandwidth on the network tod=
ay appears to be more than sufficient to saturate nearly any fully-validati=
ng node=2E

On May 3, 2017 5:53:07 PM EDT, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-de=
v@lists=2Elinuxfoundation=2Eorg> wrote:
>On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 9:08 PM, Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev
><bitcoin-dev@lists=2Elinuxfoundation=2Eorg> wrote:
>> CONS:
>
>The primary result would be paying people to sybil attack the network=2E
>It's far cheaper to run one node behind thousands of IPs than it is to
>run many nodes=2E
>
>Suggestions like this have come up many times before=2E
>_______________________________________________
>bitcoin-dev mailing list
>bitcoin-dev@lists=2Elinuxfoundation=2Eorg
>https://lists=2Elinuxfoundation=2Eorg/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev