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
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
|
Return-Path: <dev@jonasschnelli.ch>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 742F3724
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 12 Aug 2016 12:47:38 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from server3 (server3.include7.ch [144.76.194.38])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7760A15F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 12 Aug 2016 12:47:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by server3 (Postfix, from userid 115)
id 6D45F2E60684; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 14:47:36 +0200 (CEST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, FSL_HELO_NON_FQDN_1
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
Received: from Jonass-MacBook-Pro-2.local (unknown [213.55.184.206])
by server3 (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 90EBE2D00449
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 12 Aug 2016 14:47:35 +0200 (CEST)
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <57A89EA3.4020101@jonasschnelli.ch>
<57A8BCD9.7050402@AndySchroder.com>
<CAAS2fgQ1LZO=A-bqkJUod2og006iqWJn7RnyWc5cYnnnUq5MHg@mail.gmail.com>
<57A8C76D.1080405@AndySchroder.com> <57A9AA1E.9050302@jonasschnelli.ch>
From: Jonas Schnelli <dev@jonasschnelli.ch>
Message-ID: <57ADC563.5090107@jonasschnelli.ch>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 14:47:31 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <57A9AA1E.9050302@jonasschnelli.ch>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature";
boundary="9tW64LQlBhNlFeuasgUWJIpH68NT7Il60"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Authentication BIP
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 12:47:38 -0000
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--9tW64LQlBhNlFeuasgUWJIpH68NT7Il60
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="jv8pKWgG6MkFVrakPNFELj2aVlRQxknC0"
From: Jonas Schnelli <dev@jonasschnelli.ch>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Message-ID: <57ADC563.5090107@jonasschnelli.ch>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Authentication BIP
References: <57A89EA3.4020101@jonasschnelli.ch>
<57A8BCD9.7050402@AndySchroder.com>
<CAAS2fgQ1LZO=A-bqkJUod2og006iqWJn7RnyWc5cYnnnUq5MHg@mail.gmail.com>
<57A8C76D.1080405@AndySchroder.com> <57A9AA1E.9050302@jonasschnelli.ch>
In-Reply-To: <57A9AA1E.9050302@jonasschnelli.ch>
--jv8pKWgG6MkFVrakPNFELj2aVlRQxknC0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Yes. I think this limitation could be removed.
> A responding node can have =96 in theory =96 multiple identity-keys per=
> network interface (network interfaces is also confusing, because you
> could run multiple bitcoind instances on the same interface with
> different ports).
>=20
> The BIP should just make clear, that it is probably wise, to use
> different identity-keys for each network interface (ipv4, v6, tor).
>=20
I have updated that part of the BIP
-----------
Each peer can configure multiple identity-keys (ECC, 32 bytes). Peers
should make sure, each network interface (IPv4, IPv6, tor) has its own
identity-key (otherwise it would be possible to link a tor address to a
IPvX address).
The identity-public-key(s) can be shared over a different channel with
other node-operators (or non-validating clients) to grant authorized acce=
ss.
-----------
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/compare/master...jonasschnelli:2016/07/au=
th_bip?expand=3D1
</jonas>
--jv8pKWgG6MkFVrakPNFELj2aVlRQxknC0--
--9tW64LQlBhNlFeuasgUWJIpH68NT7Il60
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=JNz/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--9tW64LQlBhNlFeuasgUWJIpH68NT7Il60--
|
