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
|
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 <laanwj@gmail.com>) id 1XFhNX-0007PP-9a
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 10:26:31 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.213.173 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.213.173; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ig0-f173.google.com;
Received: from mail-ig0-f173.google.com ([209.85.213.173])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1XFhNW-0007ag-FR
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 10:26:31 +0000
Received: by mail-ig0-f173.google.com with SMTP id h18so786760igc.12
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 03:26:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.42.38.137 with SMTP id c9mr1720708ice.94.1407493585177; Fri,
08 Aug 2014 03:26:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.27.228 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Aug 2014 03:26:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJBUgi7XF4nyVEXqpZi4XYO86vTXMs40gzfu9tCdmp59tw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJHLa0Ok6s5xQcMSeLa69adLBXEaicuXqcg45eZrwYtVFbx-dA@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP2wYcxJhxRRa86Nm9ENtK2SA5VNG-L7f5pHb_W=Ajcj5Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+s+GJD+9qpwFcVfHOCCsFYjmk7A0V=65vG-7jJ6D7jj4Pi_7g@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP245242JYDBBo72XVmKgEBO96QPjcJi8Jy2Dm_r90n1Bw@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+s+GJBUgi7XF4nyVEXqpZi4XYO86vTXMs40gzfu9tCdmp59tw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 12:26:25 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+s+GJDjSR3272LsSax-2V--x4_taoqrTMiDoXSEvuiS5-MBKw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
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
(laanwj[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-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
X-Headers-End: 1XFhNW-0007ag-FR
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] NODE_EXT_SERVICES and advertising related
services
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, 08 Aug 2014 10:26:31 -0000
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
>>> He wants to use it to advertise services that are not part of the P2P
>>> protocol itself, but run on a different port. Reserving services bits
>>> for those is not acceptable.
>>
>>
>> Why not? Does the port matter much?
>
> Yes. The services bits are for advertising services on the P2P
> network. That's not open for discussion.
It also wouldn't work. A bit is not enough to find an external service
except in the naive case where the advertised service would have a
fixed port. Not even bitcoind has a fixed port. So there needs to be a
mechanism to find how to connect to the 'external service'. This is
provided by the proposed extension.
It would in principle be possible to advertise an extra service bit
*in addition to* this one, to make it easier to find through the addr
mechanism. But it would be confusing and IMO an abuse of P2P service
bits.
Wladimir
|
