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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pw@vps7135.xlshosting.net>) id 1SIMTB-0001fH-P4
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 12 Apr 2012 16:02:01 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from vps7135.xlshosting.net ([178.18.90.41])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1SIMTA-0007Ns-EK for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 12 Apr 2012 16:02:01 +0000
Received: by vps7135.xlshosting.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 784B461587; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 18:01:54 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 18:01:54 +0200
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20120412160151.GA1100@vps7135.xlshosting.net>
References: <CA+XhJbpNYUyPm2Ymcpg3grbfGnfERCsUJNJuByEJbJLsMMmMbQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T029cY-OJfZ9n-rSZc7i36e+CkOZPZixdi8EFL7oN4jhQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T029cY-OJfZ9n-rSZc7i36e+CkOZPZixdi8EFL7oN4jhQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key: http://sipa.ulyssis.org/pubkey.asc
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 1.2 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(pieter.wuille[at]gmail.com)
0.0 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED No valid author signature, adsp_override is
CUSTOM_MED
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain 1.2 NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED ADSP custom_med hit,
and not from a mailing list
X-Headers-End: 1SIMTA-0007Ns-EK
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Adding request/reply id in messages
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: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 16:02:01 -0000
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:41:05AM -0400, Gavin Andresen wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Christian Bodt <sirk390@gmail.com> wro=
te:
> > I would like to discuss the following bitcoin protocol improvement pr=
oposal:
> >
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Adding request/reply id in all messages (in the me=
ssage header,
> > based on what was done for the "checksum" field)
>=20
> That seems like a perfectly reasonable protocol improvement to me.
> Anybody else have an opinion?
If there is a reasonable use for it, I have no objections.
However: the bitcoin P2P protocol is not fully request-reply based, and t=
rying to use
it that may be be less intuitive than how it looks. For example, doing a =
second
identical "getblocks" request will not result in more "inv" replies, as t=
he client
prevents retransmits. This is not a large problem, but maybe such an exte=
nsion
should also include an extra "denied" message, which is sent if the clien=
t is
unwilling to answer (and may also be used to report transactions that are=
not
accepted into the memory pool, for example).
--=20
Pieter
|
