On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:10:47AM +0100, Mike Hearn wrote: > However, most nodes are not running in such a loop today. Probably > almost no nodes are. > > I suppose you could consider mass node death to be more benign than a > hard fork, but both are pretty damn serious and warrant immediate > action. Otherwise we're going to see the number of nodes drop sharply > over the coming days as unattended nodes die and then don't get > restarted.
I'm sure if "mass node death" becomes an issue miners will have plenty of incentive to temporarily, or permanently, setup some high-memory and high-bandwidth nodes to accept transactions. The DNS seeds sort by reliability so it won't be long before nodes are connecting to them. My home machine has 16GB of ram, bigger than the whole blockchain. -- 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
