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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1WXEbZ-0006uo-5a
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 07 Apr 2014 18:49:13 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.215.42 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.215.42; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
helo=mail-la0-f42.google.com;
Received: from mail-la0-f42.google.com ([209.85.215.42])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WXEbY-0007Kn-8n
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 07 Apr 2014 18:49:13 +0000
Received: by mail-la0-f42.google.com with SMTP id ec20so5273594lab.1
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 07 Apr 2014 11:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.186.98 with SMTP id fj2mr2004520lbc.54.1396896545578;
Mon, 07 Apr 2014 11:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.89.68 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 11:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6D6E55CE-2F04-4C34-BEE6-98AEF1478346@bitsofproof.com>
References: <CANEZrP2rgiQHpekEpFviJ22QsiV+s-F2pqosaZOA5WrRtJx5pg@mail.gmail.com>
<5342C833.5030906@gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgTqBfEPXh2dfcL_ke6c0wfXw4qUM1rAYMkAHcAM6mYH+g@mail.gmail.com>
<6D430188-CE00-44B1-BD8C-B623CF04D466@icloudtools.net>
<CANEZrP1-9LpPw4WuY8bfsEG0OLoDECXTfQCoZsZ4tmOn2H7Omw@mail.gmail.com>
<6D6E55CE-2F04-4C34-BEE6-98AEF1478346@bitsofproof.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 11:49:05 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgQaJ6P4Aj2A5Zox+CiGQK6jHvF1CkLH1R6xbadYhUXO2g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: 1.1 (+)
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
(gmaxwell[at]gmail.com)
1.2 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net
[Blocked - see <http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?209.85.215.42>]
-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
1.5 SF_NO_SPF_SPAM SF_NO_SPF_SPAM
X-Headers-End: 1WXEbY-0007Kn-8n
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Why are we bleeding nodes?
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: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 18:49:13 -0000
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com> wrote:
> BTW, did we already agree on the service bits for an archive node?
I'm still very concerned that a binary archive bit will cause extreme
load hot-spotting and the kind of binary "Use lots of resources YES or
NO" I think we're currently suffering some from, but at that point
enshrined in the protocol.
It would be much better to extend the addr messages so that nodes can
indicate a range or two of blocks that they're serving, so that all
nodes can contribute fractionally according to their means. E.g. if
you want to offer up 8 GB of distributed storage and contribute to the
availability of the blockchain, without having to swollow the whole
20, 30, 40 ... gigabyte pill.
Already we need that kind of distributed storage for the most recent
blocks to prevent extreme bandwidth load on archives, so extending it
to arbitrary ranges is only more complicated because there is
currently no room to signal it.
|
