From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
To: Suhas Daftuar <sdaftuar@gmail•com>
Cc: Suhas Daftuar via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP Proposal] New "sendheaders" p2p message
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 19:27:57 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7E19FA2C-70E5-4D8A-B533-50463FA92918@petertodd.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFp6fsFgkGV93PrdJPXnS880weNX=bXd17H1u5V7VBucTtW=7A@mail.gmail.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 24 September 2015 14:56:23 GMT-04:00, Suhas Daftuar <sdaftuar@gmail•com> wrote:
>I considered that as well, but it seemed to me that other software on
>the
>network (say, different wallet implementations) might prefer the option
>of
>being able to bump up their protocol version in the future to pick up
>some
>other change, without having to also opt-in to receiving
>headers-announcements for blocks.
>
>In particular, inv-based block announcements aren't going away (even in
>my
>implementation of headers announcements, there are some edge cases
>where
>the code would need to fall back to an inv announcement), so forcing
>all
>software on the network to upgrade to supporting headers announcements,
>whether now or in the future, seems too drastic -- I could imagine some
>software not being very concerned about optimizing block relay in this
>particular way.
Block headers are so small - 80 bytes - that it may be reasonable to just stop using the inv mechanism for them in favor of always sending headers. IIRC a inv is 32 bytes of digest and another four bytes or something of the inv string itself - that's already nearly half of the header.
Meanwhile reducing the amount of state in the protocol does have some value, and decreasing overall latency for headers to get around the network certainely isnt a bad thing.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQE9BAEBCgAnIBxQZXRlciBUb2RkIDxwZXRlQHBldGVydG9kZC5vcmc+BQJWBE60
AAoJEMCF8hzn9Lncz4MH/jybITh0VWtf+2MotWZOdMIiQtmWZ6Ly2yiDXwi3atu+
MEA6yx9vPFV8P1ZKIZzVtr/4Iu3gBHBdDxAzQW0SjreTLdzZ1+d28/A2kYD4+es7
MFD8rDV/kPtnu8ajMkS9bfmrU0WfkgSSB2fUheT+kqgH/ejIJBISo8BpQZbz7f4B
M+D+hoNadcqWcZZKBHT+o5o7v3jJwxh8qpJgMMZrtN/QfFJK5UVdU4I/hEd89XP9
XD/y29ykWAFQPDdBKMGIUj1csUGlyS5kFXp6ZLVtAZWHIgfZ1R/qOhIUcRwRxZjc
JXZEWrMGTIXr2zkX9mtLzfjAzDc6ZULoEAHCV3sVa0M=
=SLUT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-24 19:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-24 18:02 Suhas Daftuar
2015-09-24 18:17 ` Tier Nolan
2015-09-24 18:37 ` Suhas Daftuar
2015-09-24 18:41 ` Peter Todd
2015-09-24 18:56 ` Suhas Daftuar
2015-09-24 19:27 ` Peter Todd [this message]
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=7E19FA2C-70E5-4D8A-B533-50463FA92918@petertodd.org \
--to=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=sdaftuar@gmail$(echo .)com \
/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