Thanks Warren! That's great. It's also a prerequisite for chain pruning, so
it's not only about decentralisation but also scalability.
Looking forward to reviewing and merging that.
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
> I was concerned about this issue so we sponsored Blue
I was concerned about this issue so we sponsored BlueMatt to implement an
address database for bitcoinj. In the future it won't be entirely reliant
on what DNS tells it.
Warren
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Peter Todd wrote:
> As for node addresses being a service, that's what the DNS seeds
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 12:52:46AM -0800, Jeremy Spilman wrote:
> Some really nice efforts out there to map and analyze the bitcoin P2P
> network.
>
> The current protocol apparently recommends returning up to 2500 addresses
> from 'getaddr'. I'm not sure how much clients are expected to prob
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Jeremy Spilman wrote:
> Are there any past instances of applications hijacking or interfacing with
> the exiting p2p messages, or abusing 'getaddr' functionality? Are there
> any guidelines on this, or should there be?
>
>
There was a BIP by Stefan Thomas for addi
Some really nice efforts out there to map and analyze the bitcoin P2P
network.
The current protocol apparently recommends returning up to 2500 addresses
from 'getaddr'. I'm not sure how much clients are expected to probe the
address space in order to select 'far-apart' peers, or how much su
5 matches
Mail list logo
