summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/7e/4f3a13ac1350147f1604bde1a45830711b1eee
blob: 5db2d82187bb55ba0c4a9441dc471c5797a03b3d (plain)
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
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1QpIDk-0003ff-Tq
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 05 Aug 2011 11:05:40 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.212.47 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.212.47; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-vw0-f47.google.com; 
Received: from mail-vw0-f47.google.com ([209.85.212.47])
	by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1QpIDk-00085i-86
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 05 Aug 2011 11:05:40 +0000
Received: by vws2 with SMTP id 2so329099vws.34
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Fri, 05 Aug 2011 04:05:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.76.8 with SMTP id g8mr1562818vdw.178.1312542334812; Fri, 05
	Aug 2011 04:05:34 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.52.158.233 with HTTP; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 04:05:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4E3B35E7.1010409@justmoon.de>
References: <201108041423.14176.andyparkins@gmail.com>
	<201108041922.16956.andyparkins@gmail.com>
	<1312483196.3109.38.camel@Desktop666>
	<201108042042.55214.andyparkins@gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP3kEquEvqkqGqSh0iPRqoHhKLHoNgqc+9EORLoxpL7a=g@mail.gmail.com>
	<1312496173.3109.55.camel@Desktop666>
	<4E3B35E7.1010409@justmoon.de>
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 13:05:34 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: pwIZw0qP8Yyd6Yb8gWgjQfQJt-c
Message-ID: <CANEZrP1QVdOdttOk4_kzoHkVf_KYRzVFyBEpOFvi+L_DLd=74A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Stefan Thomas <moon@justmoon.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
	(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	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
	1.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1QpIDk-00085i-86
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Double spend detection to speed up
 transaction trust
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: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 11:05:41 -0000

> Could this be because the network right now consists largely of end
> users with residential type networks?

Probably.

How many connections "should" a node use? We faced this decision in
BitCoinJ recently and I asked the patch writer to reduce the number.
It seems pretty arbitrary to me - if you aren't going to relay, a
single connection should be good enough. Yes, it makes sybil easier,
but if you pick the one node randomly enough it might be ok?

> actually deployed. Wikipedia says that "some NAT routers" support it and
> that it's not an IETF standard. All routers I've actually seen in real
> life had it disabled by default.)

Hmm, I don't recall ever enabling it in my router but it's on and the
Bitcoin support works. UPnP is used by all kinds of common programs
like Skype and Xbox Live.