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 ) id 1VbL64-0008BC-Ms for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 02:01:24 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.212.170 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.170; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com; helo=mail-wi0-f170.google.com; Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com ([209.85.212.170]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1VbL62-000050-O7 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 02:01:24 +0000 Received: by mail-wi0-f170.google.com with SMTP id ex4so3480816wid.1 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 19:01:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.188.164 with SMTP id gb4mr528089wic.52.1383098476434; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 19:01:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.156.163 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 19:01:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <274a1888-276c-4aa6-a818-68f548fbe0fa@me.com> <9DCDB8F6-E3B2-426B-A41E-087E66B3821A@gmail.com> <526B45DB.2030200@jerviss.org> <526DD18A.7060201@jerviss.org> <20131029101452.GA15808@savin> <7a22afbd-ad30-4748-8c88-9a1eda3e2fe9@email.android.com> Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 12:01:16 +1000 Message-ID: From: Gavin Andresen To: Mike Hearn Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c25c9e609aee04e9ebb507 X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) 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 (gavinandresen[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -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 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: plan99.net] X-Headers-End: 1VbL62-000050-O7 Cc: Bitcoin Development , Andreas Schildbach Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Feedback requested: "reject" p2p message X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 02:01:24 -0000 --001a11c25c9e609aee04e9ebb507 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Mike Hearn wrote: > Yes, exactly. That's the point. As you well know I think the whole > soft-fork mechanism is wrong and should not be used. If the rules change, > your node is *supposed* to end up on a chain fork and trigger an alert to > you, that's pretty much the whole purpose of Bitcoin's design. Undermining > that security model is problematic. > But if you are getting soft-forked recent versions of the reference implementation WILL alert you; see this code in main.cpp: if (nUpgraded > 100/2) strMiscWarning = _("Warning: This version is obsolete, upgrade required!"); That is, if more than half of the last 100 blocks are up-version, warn. block.version is part of the block header, so SPV clients can (and probably should) do the same. There are also warnings if you are forked, and, most recently, warnings if there is a high-work alternative fork. -- -- Gavin Andresen --001a11c25c9e609aee04e9ebb507 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.n= et> wrote:
Yes, exactly. That's the point. As you well know I thi= nk the whole soft-fork mechanism is wrong and should not be used. If the ru= les change, your node is *supposed* to end up on a chain fork and trigger a= n alert to you, that's pretty much the whole purpose of Bitcoin's d= esign. Undermining that security model is problematic.

But if you are getting soft-forked recent = versions of the reference implementation WILL alert you; see this code in m= ain.cpp:

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 if (nUpgraded > 1= 00/2)
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 strMiscWarning =3D _("Warning: This versi= on is obsolete, upgrade required!");

Th= at is, if more than half of the last 100 blocks are up-version, warn. =A0bl= ock.version is part of the block header, so SPV clients can (and probably s= hould) do the same.

There are also warnings if you are forked, and, most re= cently, warnings if there is a high-work alternative fork.

--
--
Gavin Andresen
--001a11c25c9e609aee04e9ebb507--