From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99•net>
To: Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr•org>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>,
kjj <bitcoin-devel@jerviss•org>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Feedback requested: "reject" p2p message
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 15:50:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANEZrP1zr7vOUA3gF3aXeCVBBkNHvruJBWLcELHiUe8kDmnkUQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201310271439.52983.luke@dashjr.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1402 bytes --]
These nodes are much more likely to just be broken than malicious, but
without any way to diagnose why they are dropping a transaction it's hard
to find out what's really going on.
Anyway, yes, I need to spend time adding timeouts and all kinds of other
things, although of course if the transactions are being rejected due to a
change in network rules that won't help either - if the nodes you're
connected to are silently eating your transaction, there's no sane UI that
can result from that without more explicit error handling.
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr•org> wrote:
> On Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:32:57 PM Mike Hearn wrote:
> > Currently bitcoinj gets a small but steady stream of bug reports of the
> form
> > "my transaction did not propagate". It's flaky because the library picks
> one
> > peer to send the transaction to, and then watches it propagate across the
> > network. But if that selected peer refuses the tx for whatever reason,
> that
> > propagation never comes, and there's currently no timeout to make it
> retry
> > with a different node.
>
> Sounds like the real bug is "BitcoinJ relies on good/servant behaviour from
> other nodes". Don't assume your random node isn't hostile. Handling a peer
> that doesn't relay your transaction for any reason (including if they lie
> to
> you about having done so) should be expected behaviour.
>
> Luke
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1914 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-27 14:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-26 0:34 Gavin Andresen
2013-10-26 1:01 ` Jean-Paul Kogelman
2013-10-26 2:00 ` Gavin
2013-10-26 4:32 ` kjj
2013-10-27 14:32 ` Mike Hearn
2013-10-27 14:39 ` Luke-Jr
2013-10-27 14:50 ` Mike Hearn [this message]
2013-10-30 17:13 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-10-31 12:01 ` Mike Hearn
2013-10-27 22:52 ` Gavin Andresen
2013-10-28 2:52 ` kjj
2013-10-28 9:26 ` Andreas Schildbach
2013-10-28 9:32 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-10-29 5:37 ` Gavin Andresen
2013-10-29 8:55 ` Warren Togami Jr.
2013-10-29 9:12 ` Peter Todd
2013-10-29 9:52 ` Mike Hearn
2013-10-29 10:14 ` Peter Todd
2013-10-29 11:38 ` Peter Todd
2013-10-29 12:32 ` Mike Hearn
2013-10-29 16:35 ` [Bitcoin-development] On soft-forks and hard-forks Peter Todd
2013-10-30 2:01 ` [Bitcoin-development] Feedback requested: "reject" p2p message Gavin Andresen
2013-10-30 8:24 ` Mike Hearn
2013-10-30 9:05 ` Mark Friedenbach
2013-10-30 10:26 ` Mike Hearn
2013-10-28 2:59 ` Luke-Jr
2013-10-28 3:02 ` Pieter Wuille
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=CANEZrP1zr7vOUA3gF3aXeCVBBkNHvruJBWLcELHiUe8kDmnkUQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=mike@plan99$(echo .)net \
--cc=bitcoin-devel@jerviss$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=luke@dashjr$(echo .)org \
/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