Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal
On 21/10/13 21:47, Luke-Jr wrote: On Monday, October 21, 2013 7:38:37 PM Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote: 1) Should the protocol specification page also be codified into BIP(s)? Probably wouldn't hurt, but it'd likely need a rewrite in a more modular and formal form. I wanted to have a look at how the whole Bitcoin thing works recently. Being a distributed application, I've searched for the protocol spec. What I found were two wiki pages (Protocol ProtocolRules) that looked more like notes someone wrote down while implementing the application. Have I missed something? Is there any effort underway trying to produce a decent spec? If not so, I am willing to help with that. Martin -- October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal
I wanted to have a look at how the whole Bitcoin thing works recently. Being a distributed application, I've searched for the protocol spec. What I found were two wiki pages (Protocol ProtocolRules) that looked more like notes someone wrote down while implementing the application. Have I missed something? Is there any effort underway trying to produce a decent spec? If not so, I am willing to help with that. Have you seen: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification ? signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -- October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:59 PM, Jean-Paul Kogelman jeanpaulkogel...@me.com wrote: Have you seen: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification ? Take care, the information in the wiki is woefully incomplete. -- October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal
On 22/10/13 09:03, Gregory Maxwell wrote: On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:59 PM, Jean-Paul Kogelman jeanpaulkogel...@me.com wrote: Have you seen: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification ? Take care, the information in the wiki is woefully incomplete. Imagine myself, with no prior knowledge of Bitcoin looking at the document. It starts with Hashes. What hashes? No idea what's going on. Etc. Now compare that to a well written RFC. It starts with introduction, description of the problem, explains the conceptual model of the solution, then dives into the details. There's also Security Considerations part in every RFC that is pretty relevant for Bitcoin. As I said, I am willing to help with writing such document, it would be a nice way of learning the stuff, however, help from core devs, such as answering question that may arise in the process, or reviewing the document would be needed. Martin -- October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 09:34:57AM +0200, Martin Sustrik wrote: On 22/10/13 09:03, Gregory Maxwell wrote: On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:59 PM, Jean-Paul Kogelman jeanpaulkogel...@me.com wrote: Have you seen: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification ? Take care, the information in the wiki is woefully incomplete. Imagine myself, with no prior knowledge of Bitcoin looking at the document. It starts with Hashes. What hashes? No idea what's going on. Etc. Now compare that to a well written RFC. It starts with introduction, description of the problem, explains the conceptual model of the solution, then dives into the details. There's also Security Considerations part in every RFC that is pretty relevant for Bitcoin. As I said, I am willing to help with writing such document, it would be a nice way of learning the stuff, however, help from core devs, such as answering question that may arise in the process, or reviewing the document would be needed. Writing such RFCs is dangerous due to the consensus nature of Bitcoin - it makes people think the standard is the RFC, rather than the code. I hear one of the better intros to Bitcoin is the Khan academy videos, but I've never watched them myself. Once you understand how it works, start reading source code - the Bitcoin codebase is actually really simple and readable. However remember that the implications of that codebase are anything but simple; there's lots of reasons to think Satoshi himself didn't understand Bitcoin all that well, even by the time he left the project. -- 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 000f155e7a648e84a83589048ae1cacb0c60bfce2437553b6af4 signature.asc Description: Digital signature -- October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Martin Sustrik sust...@250bpm.com wrote: There's also Security Considerations part in every RFC that is pretty relevant for Bitcoin. Which would say something interesting like If the bitcoin network implements inconsistent behavior in the consensus critical parts of the protocol the world ends. As such, conformance or _non_-conformance with this specification (in particular, sections 4. 5. and 6.) may be required for security. A Bitcoin protocol RFC would be a great place to exercise RFC 6919 keywords. ( http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6919 ) -- October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal
On 22/10/13 09:56, Gregory Maxwell wrote: On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Martin Sustrik sust...@250bpm.com wrote: There's also Security Considerations part in every RFC that is pretty relevant for Bitcoin. Which would say something interesting like If the bitcoin network implements inconsistent behavior in the consensus critical parts of the protocol the world ends. As such, conformance or _non_-conformance with this specification (in particular, sections 4. 5. and 6.) may be required for security. In fact, yes. In the end it boils down to saying something like: Bitcoin is a unique global distributed application and thus all implementations MUST support the version of the protocol currently in use, irrespective of whether it have been documented and/or published. This RFC is meant only for informational purposes and is a snapshot of the protocol as to Oct 22nd 2013. That being said, I understand the idea of not publishing the spec so that everyone is forced to work with live data. A Bitcoin protocol RFC would be a great place to exercise RFC 6919 keywords. ( http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6919 ) Heh. Haven't seen that one. Martin -- October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal
All that is good practice, but we should avoid adding burdensome process that might discourage BIP writing. Consider a distributed approach: if you feel a draft needs more sections or better language, submit a pull request yourself and help community-edit the document. On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:34 AM, Martin Sustrik sust...@250bpm.com wrote: On 22/10/13 09:03, Gregory Maxwell wrote: On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:59 PM, Jean-Paul Kogelman jeanpaulkogel...@me.com wrote: Have you seen: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification ? Take care, the information in the wiki is woefully incomplete. Imagine myself, with no prior knowledge of Bitcoin looking at the document. It starts with Hashes. What hashes? No idea what's going on. Etc. Now compare that to a well written RFC. It starts with introduction, description of the problem, explains the conceptual model of the solution, then dives into the details. There's also Security Considerations part in every RFC that is pretty relevant for Bitcoin. As I said, I am willing to help with writing such document, it would be a nice way of learning the stuff, however, help from core devs, such as answering question that may arise in the process, or reviewing the document would be needed. Martin -- October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -- Jeff Garzik Senior Software Engineer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ -- October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP39 word list
I think this is a good idea; I just pushed new unit test test_similarity() to github which finds such similar words. Right now it identifies ~90 similar pairs in current wordlist, I'll update wordlist tomorrow to pass this test. slush On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 1:52 AM, jan jan.mare...@gmail.com wrote: I think avoiding words that could look similar when written down would be a good idea aswell. I searched for words that only differ by the letters c e, g y, u v and found the following: car ear cat eat gear year value valve Other combinations could potentially be problematic depending on the handwriting style: ft, ao, ij, vy, possibly even lt and il? -- October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
