1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com>) id 1VZsGM-0000jL-4b
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 26 Oct 2013 01:01:58 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of me.com
designates 17.172.220.236 as permitted sender)
client-ip=17.172.220.236; envelope-from=jeanpaulkogelman@me.com;
helo=st11p02mm-asmtp001.mac.com;
Received: from st11p02mm-asmtp001.mac.com ([17.172.220.236])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1VZsGL-0004ji-4i for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 26 Oct 2013 01:01:57 +0000
Received: from st11p02mm-spool001.mac.com ([17.172.220.246])
by st11p02mm-asmtp001.mac.com
(Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.08(7.0.4.27.7) 64bit
(built Aug
22 2013)) with ESMTP id <0MV900L3F473JU30@st11p02mm-asmtp001.mac.com>
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat,
26 Oct 2013 01:01:51 +0000 (GMT)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure
engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8794,1.0.431,0.0.0000
definitions=2013-10-26_01:2013-10-26, 2013-10-25,
1970-01-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0
suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam
adjust=0
reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1308280000
definitions=main-1310250230
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_f2PgK4UK1fUkHuXE27bFuA)"
Received: from localhost ([17.172.220.223]) by st11p02mm-spool001.mac.com
(Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.08(7.0.4.27.7) 64bit
(built Aug
22 2013)) with ESMTP id <0MV9002KQ4738780@st11p02mm-spool001.mac.com>;
Sat, 26 Oct 2013 01:01:51 +0000 (GMT)
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
From: Jean-Paul Kogelman <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 01:01:49 +0000 (GMT)
X-Mailer: iCloud MailClient1T.111546 MailServer1T
X-Originating-IP: [159.153.138.53]
Message-id: <274a1888-276c-4aa6-a818-68f548fbe0fa@me.com>
In-reply-to: <CABsx9T2UfGNiCuCzw00Tgk8aZQ=ZcnT=bDFqrsrYC7r355QRmw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
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 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
X-Headers-End: 1VZsGL-0004ji-4i
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
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: <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: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 01:01:58 -0000
--Boundary_(ID_f2PgK4UK1fUkHuXE27bFuA)
Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Would it make sense to use either fixed length strings or maybe even enums?
On Oct 25, 2013, at 05:34 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com> wrote:
Mike Hearn has been lobbying for an "error" message in the Bitcoin p2p protocol for years (at least since the "ban peers if they send us garbage" denial-of-service mitigation code was pull-requested). This came up again with my proposed "smartfee" changes, which would drop low-priority or low-fee transactions.
--Boundary_(ID_f2PgK4UK1fUkHuXE27bFuA)
Content-type: multipart/related;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_1zzGwr7TP2MT4hys7Yji7g)"; type="text/html"
--Boundary_(ID_1zzGwr7TP2MT4hys7Yji7g)
Content-type: text/html; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
<html><body><div><br></div><div>Would it make sense to use either fixed length strings or maybe even enums?<br><br>On Oct 25, 2013, at 05:34 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com> wrote:<br><span style="line-height: 1.4;">Mike Hearn has been lobbying for an "error" message in the Bitcoin p2p protocol for years (at least since the "ban peers if they send us garbage" denial-of-service mitigation code was pull-requested). This came up again with my proposed "smartfee" changes, which would drop low-priority or low-fee transactions.</span></div></body></html>
--Boundary_(ID_1zzGwr7TP2MT4hys7Yji7g)--
--Boundary_(ID_f2PgK4UK1fUkHuXE27bFuA)--
|
