From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99•net>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] NODE_EXT_SERVICES and advertising related services
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 13:38:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANEZrP1mhSodC-ZvkuVKAgHO44bM7QX=RivRDhnDeHOKr8PXqQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJHLa0N3xx1QZ==iSLYNsdgkBGoqN34+4eVtukkjn+3SrDhC7A@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1328 bytes --]
I'd like to see a mechanism whereby a Bitcoin node can delegate processing
of unknown messages to an external process, so a P2P node can be composed
out of separated programs, but such a service would be indistinguishable at
the network layer from one provided by Bitcoin Core itself, so a service
bit would be appropriate for those.
For instance, Insight could then offer a command set that extends the p2p
protocol for doing block explorer type queries. There's no need for the
protocol to be Insight specific. You'd just have NODE_INDEXED_CHAIN
instead.
Having the service run on some arbitrary other port isn't particularly
useful, IMO - the biggest win from having some separated protocol would be
the ability to use TLS, but if you're connecting to an IP address rather
than a domain name (like if you discovered via service bits/getextsrv) this
doesn't add much. It boils down to minor syntax differences in how numbers
are laid out in a grid. And the performance issue remains.
Additionally, nothing in this spec requires that a local bitcoind be
running. What stops someone from advertising just NODE_EXTENDED_SERVICES
and nothing else? I don't think a generic service advertisement mechanism
is a bad thing to have, by the way, just pointing out that nothing makes
this more focused than service bits already are.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1459 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-08 11:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-08 3:38 Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 9:45 ` Mike Hearn
2014-08-08 9:56 ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 10:01 ` Mike Hearn
2014-08-08 10:15 ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 10:26 ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 10:41 ` Christian Decker
2014-08-08 11:22 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 11:33 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 11:38 ` Mike Hearn [this message]
2014-08-08 11:59 ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 12:06 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 12:11 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 12:15 ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 12:11 ` Mike Hearn
2014-08-08 12:15 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 12:16 ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 12:34 ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 13:55 ` Mike Hearn
2014-08-08 12:04 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 12:13 ` Mike Hearn
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='CANEZrP1mhSodC-ZvkuVKAgHO44bM7QX=RivRDhnDeHOKr8PXqQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=mike@plan99$(echo .)net \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=jgarzik@bitpay$(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