public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian•com.au>
To: Pieter Wuille <bitcoin-dev@wuille•net>,
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
	<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Dhruv M <dhruv@bip324•com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Refreshed BIP324
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2023 02:03:37 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y/TrWS1Y3JkxHsQn@erisian.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1zGcFRzB9Has9bXWlYaOXXnOy9jxwLJvhkL_46OlA8JRsx2ultkYweDdPnW3Tbf145byXb8cG8pimWBT0qBBDaKisufJufP2wssDtigKass=@wuille.net>

On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 03:22:30PM +0000, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> On Sunday, February 19th, 2023 at 6:56 PM, Anthony Towns <aj@erisian•com.au> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 10:13:05PM +0000, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > > > I think it's probably less complex to close some of the doors?
> > > > 2) are short ids available/meaningful to send prior to VERACK being
> > > > completed?
> > > > Ah, I hadn't considered this nuance. If we don't care about them being available before VERACK negotiation, then it may be possible to introduce a way to negotiate a different short id mapping table without needing a mechanism for re-negotiating.
> > I think you still need/want two negotiation steps -- once to tell each
> > other what tables you know about, once to choose a mutually recognised
> > table and specify any additions.
> Right, I wasn't talking about how many steps/messages the negotiation takes. I just meant that if all negotiation of the mapping table happens just once (before VERACK) and that negotiation itself happens without use of short commands, then there is no need for re-negotiating short commands after they are already in use. Nothing concrete, but I can imagine that that may simplify some implementations.

Yeah; I was just thinking of the fact that currently the negotiation is:

 * send your VERSION message
 * see what their VERSION message is

 * announce a bunch of features, depending on the version (or service
   flags)
 * send the VERACK (and GETADDR and final ALERT)

 * wait for their announcements and VERACK
 * negotiation is finished; we know everything; we're ready to go

which only gets you two steps if you send the short id stuff as part of
the VERSION message. Obviously you could just add an extra phase either
just before or just after the VERACK, though.

I suppose being able to choose your own short id mapping from day 0 would
mean that every bip324 node could use a single short id mapping for all
outgoing messages, which might also make implementation marginally easier
(no need to use one table for modern nodes, but also support the original
table for old bip324 implementations)...

Cheers,
aj


  reply	other threads:[~2023-02-21 16:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-10-08 12:59 Dhruv M
2022-10-26 16:39 ` Pieter Wuille
2022-10-27  7:28   ` Vasil Dimov
2022-11-03 17:53   ` Murch
2022-11-03 22:26     ` Jonas Schnelli
2022-11-08  3:20   ` Anthony Towns
2022-11-10 21:23     ` Pieter Wuille
2022-11-12  3:23       ` Pieter Wuille
2022-11-12 18:52         ` Yuval Kogman
2022-11-18  8:24         ` Anthony Towns
2023-01-05 22:06           ` Pieter Wuille
2023-01-05 23:12             ` Anthony Towns
2023-01-09  8:11               ` Anthony Towns
2023-02-16 17:43                 ` Dhruv M
2023-02-17 15:51                   ` Anthony Towns
2023-02-17 22:13                     ` Pieter Wuille
2023-02-19 23:56                       ` Anthony Towns
2023-02-20 15:22                         ` Pieter Wuille
2023-02-21 16:03                           ` Anthony Towns [this message]
2023-02-28 18:07                             ` Dhruv M
2023-02-28 21:02                               ` Erik Aronesty
2023-10-11 20:52 ` Tim Ruffing

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=Y/TrWS1Y3JkxHsQn@erisian.com.au \
    --to=aj@erisian$(echo .)com.au \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@wuille$(echo .)net \
    --cc=dhruv@bip324$(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