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
|
Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF7D7305
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 22:14:43 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com (mail-wi0-f170.google.com
[209.85.212.170])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C2DD112
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 22:14:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wicmv11 with SMTP id mv11so26095546wic.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:14:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=6qgV7FzGvcSiFrWGFxdxP0+CgmX+mN/AL9hIdi/elqI=;
b=ckyh/bjlJP/E78PEWqKRdwi/lIqPI4C4I9dbCMgSW7n02xguU3o8tIlfpGcSPS2Zpg
G+PUE2TnaOmDfgVaJk8Met2qX93wQt2y0ePDyfSB+2Agdg89Exvzfh0w5HWe7ArPVF7S
evmCf6tacuROzKpccLTEb9W1ucqEd45sb2wheG08HYfdiCLHM9H0KeBwGQAuG3jhP14P
zta5z/cRbCb3KnBM5L58gYU1zHqjmru+OfPbquboK8Ut0dboc/+DqHZSunStZOFXykOX
rk7/y0oISSZdG68DInhgBPCf4C+lKQ2YyLquQwiZ6hdZ+HbxuTUV4PzpsxjCqEiz3VDS
llVQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnD3IpY8sqrAqoMtU5ofd0bw/6nZret6xMJt+BBg6u3+GNdKXBA23S8Z9o4+GNqWmY4aGBA
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.187.170 with SMTP id ft10mr59251545wjc.26.1437430481884;
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.95.168 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <55AAACF9.90007@gmail.com>
References: <20150718185259.GA3477@muck>
<55AAACF9.90007@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 00:14:41 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDqayOVT6YHf5w5qTOtsKCBsOxc=fxMpR2YZJs26km=vNQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Patrick Strateman <patrick.strateman@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Do we really need a mempool? (for relay nodes)
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 22:14:44 -0000
On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 9:46 PM, Patrick Strateman via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Relay nodes do not need a mempool, but do need some mechanism to avoid DoS
> issues.
>
> Wallet nodes can use the mempool for fee estimation (in addition to looking
> at past blocks).
Exactly, so an anti-DoS mechanism that would be sufficient for a
non-mempool node would be also useful for small values in -maxmempool.
I think a simple cache for transaction validations should be enough.
Please, review a draft for that in the newest #6448.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6448
I would be happy to rebase it back to 0.11 and even 0.10.
|
