From: jan@uos•de
To: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.3.24
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 18:35:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110701163558.GA7311@dax.lan.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimobc7471uBMLBecYT3vz0GO6RLzQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 11:06:56AM -0400, Gavin Andresen wrote:
> > Not sure about OS differentiation, seems...wrong? Maybe disabled by
> > default on bitcoind but on by default on bitcoin?
>
> OK. I mis-remembered the poll:
> http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=4392.0
>
> On by default 8 (20%)
> Off by default 22 (55%)
> On by default in the GUI, off by default in bitcoind 10 (25%)
I just voted as well and now - with some extra votes in the meantime -
it's 9 / 22 / 13. So exactly 50/50 between off (22) and some form of on
(9 + 13).
I'm in favor of turning it on by default in the GUI and leaving it off
in bitcoind.
I don't like UPnP much, I find it exemplifies exactly what is wrong with
computer security today: Convenience trumps security almost every time.
BUT: I don't think this is the moment to fight UPnP. It's the standard
mechanism in use today to let a computer behind a NAT accept incoming
connections. The user has already made the decision in regards to
convenience over security. By enabling UPnP (or by buying a product that
does this automatically) they are saying: I want it to "just work"
instead of having fine-grained but more complicated control.
Bitcoin is a P2P application and as such should use this
mechanism. I think it's pretty clear that participating in a P2P network
requires one to receive messages from other peers. At least no one seems
to be concerned that Bitcoin (by default!) listens on port 8333. So I
think it's only logical to extend that to work behind NATs as well.
Cheers!
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-01 16:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-01 0:07 Matt Corallo
2011-07-01 2:07 ` Gregory Maxwell
2011-07-01 2:44 ` Douglas Huff
2011-07-01 12:41 ` Douglas Huff
2011-07-01 8:00 ` Pieter Wuille
2011-07-01 8:39 ` Jeff Garzik
2011-07-01 12:31 ` Gavin Andresen
2011-07-01 12:40 ` Matt Corallo
2011-07-01 15:06 ` Gavin Andresen
2011-07-01 16:35 ` jan [this message]
2011-07-01 16:47 ` Robert McKay
2011-07-01 17:47 ` Douglas Huff
2011-07-01 17:50 ` Matt Corallo
2011-07-01 17:52 ` Douglas Huff
2011-07-01 22:03 ` Matt Corallo
2011-07-01 22:07 ` Douglas Huff
2011-07-01 17:59 ` Gregory Maxwell
2011-07-01 23:42 ` Jeff Garzik
2011-07-02 0:37 ` Jeff Garzik
2011-07-02 0:46 ` Matt Corallo
2011-07-02 0:51 ` Gregory Maxwell
2011-07-02 1:05 ` Douglas Huff
2011-07-02 1:12 ` Matt Corallo
2011-07-02 2:05 ` Gavin Andresen
2011-07-02 21:07 ` Jeff Garzik
2011-07-03 1:58 ` Matt Corallo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110701163558.GA7311@dax.lan.local \
--to=jan@uos$(echo .)de \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox