Re: [Bitcoin-development] Zero-Conf for Full Node Discovery

2015-05-27 Thread Louis Rossouw
Also think it would be useful.

Created an issue for it some time back:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3802
I think nodes don't only have to connect to LAN nodes. Especially with
headers first.
They can still connect to other nodes as well.  Having said that security
is problematic in any case on a hotel wifi or similar.  All traffic can be
spoofed.
With HF they'd be loading most of the data from the LAN node though.
This will help people having multiple nodes at home reduce bandwidth and
improve sync without difficult setup.


On Tue, 26 May 2015 at 12:50 Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote:

 Very interesting Matt.

 For what it's worth, in future bitcoinj is very likely to bootstrap from
 Cartographer nodes (signed HTTP) rather than DNS, and we're also steadily
 working towards Tor by default. So this approach will probably stop working
 at some point. As breaking PorcFest would kind of suck, we might want a
 ZeroConf/Rendezvous solution in place so local LANs can capture Bitcoin
 traffic away from Tor (with some notification to the user, presumably).



 On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Matt Whitlock b...@mattwhitlock.name
 wrote:

 On Tuesday, 26 May 2015, at 1:15 am, Peter Todd wrote:
  On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:52:07AM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:
   On Monday, 25 May 2015, at 11:48 pm, Jim Phillips wrote:
Do any wallets actually do this yet?
  
   Not that I know of, but they do seed their address database via DNS,
 which you can poison if you control the LAN's DNS resolver. I did this for
 a Bitcoin-only Wi-Fi network I operated at a remote festival. We had well
 over a hundred lightweight wallets, all trying to connect to the Bitcoin
 P2P network over a very bandwidth-constrained Internet link, so I poisoned
 the DNS and rejected all outbound connection attempts on port 8333, to
 force all the wallets to connect to a single local full node, which had
 connectivity to a single remote node over the Internet. Thus, all the
 lightweight wallets at the festival had Bitcoin network connectivity, but
 we only needed to backhaul the Bitcoin network's transaction traffic once.
 
  Interesting!
 
  What festival was this?

 The Porcupine Freedom Festival (PorcFest) in New Hampshire last summer.
 I strongly suspect that it's the largest gathering of Bitcoin users at any
 event that is not specifically Bitcoin-themed. There's a lot of overlap
 between the Bitcoin and liberty communities. PorcFest draws somewhere
 around 1000-2000 attendees, a solid quarter of whom have Bitcoin wallets on
 their mobile devices.

 The backhaul was a 3G cellular Internet connection, and the local Bitcoin
 node and network router were hosted on a Raspberry Pi with some Netfilter
 tricks to restrict connectivity. The net result was that all Bitcoin nodes
 (lightweight and heavyweight) on the local Wi-Fi network were unable to
 connect to any Bitcoin nodes except for the local node, which they
 discovered via DNS. I also had provisions in place to allow outbound
 connectivity to the API servers for Mycelium, Blockchain, and Coinbase
 wallets, by feeding the DNS resolver's results in real-time into a
 whitelisting Netfilter rule utilizing IP Sets.

 For your amusement, here's the graphic for the banner that I had made to
 advertise the network at the festival (*chuckle*):
 http://www.mattwhitlock.com/bitcoin_wifi.png


 --
 One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud
 Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
 Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
 Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
 http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
 ___
 Bitcoin-development mailing list
 Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development



 --
 One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud
 Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
 Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
 Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
 http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
 ___
 Bitcoin-development mailing list
 Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

--
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


Re: [Bitcoin-development] Zero-Conf for Full Node Discovery

2015-05-26 Thread Mike Hearn
Very interesting Matt.

For what it's worth, in future bitcoinj is very likely to bootstrap from
Cartographer nodes (signed HTTP) rather than DNS, and we're also steadily
working towards Tor by default. So this approach will probably stop working
at some point. As breaking PorcFest would kind of suck, we might want a
ZeroConf/Rendezvous solution in place so local LANs can capture Bitcoin
traffic away from Tor (with some notification to the user, presumably).



On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Matt Whitlock b...@mattwhitlock.name
wrote:

 On Tuesday, 26 May 2015, at 1:15 am, Peter Todd wrote:
  On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:52:07AM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:
   On Monday, 25 May 2015, at 11:48 pm, Jim Phillips wrote:
Do any wallets actually do this yet?
  
   Not that I know of, but they do seed their address database via DNS,
 which you can poison if you control the LAN's DNS resolver. I did this for
 a Bitcoin-only Wi-Fi network I operated at a remote festival. We had well
 over a hundred lightweight wallets, all trying to connect to the Bitcoin
 P2P network over a very bandwidth-constrained Internet link, so I poisoned
 the DNS and rejected all outbound connection attempts on port 8333, to
 force all the wallets to connect to a single local full node, which had
 connectivity to a single remote node over the Internet. Thus, all the
 lightweight wallets at the festival had Bitcoin network connectivity, but
 we only needed to backhaul the Bitcoin network's transaction traffic once.
 
  Interesting!
 
  What festival was this?

 The Porcupine Freedom Festival (PorcFest) in New Hampshire last summer.
 I strongly suspect that it's the largest gathering of Bitcoin users at any
 event that is not specifically Bitcoin-themed. There's a lot of overlap
 between the Bitcoin and liberty communities. PorcFest draws somewhere
 around 1000-2000 attendees, a solid quarter of whom have Bitcoin wallets on
 their mobile devices.

 The backhaul was a 3G cellular Internet connection, and the local Bitcoin
 node and network router were hosted on a Raspberry Pi with some Netfilter
 tricks to restrict connectivity. The net result was that all Bitcoin nodes
 (lightweight and heavyweight) on the local Wi-Fi network were unable to
 connect to any Bitcoin nodes except for the local node, which they
 discovered via DNS. I also had provisions in place to allow outbound
 connectivity to the API servers for Mycelium, Blockchain, and Coinbase
 wallets, by feeding the DNS resolver's results in real-time into a
 whitelisting Netfilter rule utilizing IP Sets.

 For your amusement, here's the graphic for the banner that I had made to
 advertise the network at the festival (*chuckle*):
 http://www.mattwhitlock.com/bitcoin_wifi.png


 --
 One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud
 Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
 Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
 Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
 http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
 ___
 Bitcoin-development mailing list
 Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

--
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


Re: [Bitcoin-development] Zero-Conf for Full Node Discovery

2015-05-25 Thread Matt Whitlock
On Tuesday, 26 May 2015, at 1:15 am, Peter Todd wrote:
 On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:52:07AM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:
  On Monday, 25 May 2015, at 11:48 pm, Jim Phillips wrote:
   Do any wallets actually do this yet?
  
  Not that I know of, but they do seed their address database via DNS, which 
  you can poison if you control the LAN's DNS resolver. I did this for a 
  Bitcoin-only Wi-Fi network I operated at a remote festival. We had well 
  over a hundred lightweight wallets, all trying to connect to the Bitcoin 
  P2P network over a very bandwidth-constrained Internet link, so I poisoned 
  the DNS and rejected all outbound connection attempts on port 8333, to 
  force all the wallets to connect to a single local full node, which had 
  connectivity to a single remote node over the Internet. Thus, all the 
  lightweight wallets at the festival had Bitcoin network connectivity, but 
  we only needed to backhaul the Bitcoin network's transaction traffic once.
 
 Interesting!
 
 What festival was this?

The Porcupine Freedom Festival (PorcFest) in New Hampshire last summer. I 
strongly suspect that it's the largest gathering of Bitcoin users at any event 
that is not specifically Bitcoin-themed. There's a lot of overlap between the 
Bitcoin and liberty communities. PorcFest draws somewhere around 1000-2000 
attendees, a solid quarter of whom have Bitcoin wallets on their mobile devices.

The backhaul was a 3G cellular Internet connection, and the local Bitcoin node 
and network router were hosted on a Raspberry Pi with some Netfilter tricks to 
restrict connectivity. The net result was that all Bitcoin nodes (lightweight 
and heavyweight) on the local Wi-Fi network were unable to connect to any 
Bitcoin nodes except for the local node, which they discovered via DNS. I also 
had provisions in place to allow outbound connectivity to the API servers for 
Mycelium, Blockchain, and Coinbase wallets, by feeding the DNS resolver's 
results in real-time into a whitelisting Netfilter rule utilizing IP Sets.

For your amusement, here's the graphic for the banner that I had made to 
advertise the network at the festival (*chuckle*): 
http://www.mattwhitlock.com/bitcoin_wifi.png

--
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


Re: [Bitcoin-development] Zero-Conf for Full Node Discovery

2015-05-25 Thread Matt Whitlock
Who would be performing a Sybil attack against themselves? We're talking about 
a LAN here. All the nodes would be under the control of the same entity. In 
that case, you actually want them all connecting solely to a central hub node 
on the LAN, and the hub node should connect to diverse and unpredictable 
other nodes on the Bitcoin network.


On Monday, 25 May 2015, at 9:46 pm, Kevin Greene wrote:
 This is something you actually don't want. In order to make it as difficult
 as possible for an attacker to perform a sybil attack, you want to choose a
 set of peers that is as diverse, and unpredictable as possible.
 
 
 On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 9:37 PM, Matt Whitlock b...@mattwhitlock.name
 wrote:
 
  This is very simple to do. Just ping the all nodes address (ff02::1) and
  try connecting to TCP port 8333 of each node that responds. Shouldn't take
  but more than a few milliseconds on any but the most densely populated LANs.
 
 
  On Monday, 25 May 2015, at 11:06 pm, Jim Phillips wrote:
   Is there any work being done on using some kind of zero-conf service
   discovery protocol so that lightweight clients can find a full node on
  the
   same LAN to peer with rather than having to tie up WAN bandwidth?
  
   I envision a future where lightweight devices within a home use SPV over
   WiFi to connect with a home server which in turn relays the transactions
   they create out to the larger and faster relays on the Internet.
  
   In a situation where there are hundreds or thousands of small SPV devices
   in a single home (if 21, Inc. is successful) monitoring the blockchain,
   this could result in lower traffic across the slow WAN connection.  And
   yes, I realize it could potentially take a LOT of these devices before
  the
   total bandwidth is greater than downloading a full copy of the
  blockchain,
   but there's other reasons to host your own full node -- trust being one.
  
   --
   *James G. Phillips IV*
   https://plus.google.com/u/0/113107039501292625391/posts
   http://www.linkedin.com/in/ergophobe
  
   *Don't bunt. Aim out of the ball park. Aim for the company of
  immortals.
   -- David Ogilvy*
  
*This message was created with 100% recycled electrons. Please think
  twice
   before printing.*
 
 
  --
  One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud
  Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
  Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
  Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
  http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
  ___
  Bitcoin-development mailing list
  Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
  https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
 

--
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


Re: [Bitcoin-development] Zero-Conf for Full Node Discovery

2015-05-25 Thread Kevin Greene
This is something you actually don't want. In order to make it as difficult
as possible for an attacker to perform a sybil attack, you want to choose a
set of peers that is as diverse, and unpredictable as possible.


On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 9:37 PM, Matt Whitlock b...@mattwhitlock.name
wrote:

 This is very simple to do. Just ping the all nodes address (ff02::1) and
 try connecting to TCP port 8333 of each node that responds. Shouldn't take
 but more than a few milliseconds on any but the most densely populated LANs.


 On Monday, 25 May 2015, at 11:06 pm, Jim Phillips wrote:
  Is there any work being done on using some kind of zero-conf service
  discovery protocol so that lightweight clients can find a full node on
 the
  same LAN to peer with rather than having to tie up WAN bandwidth?
 
  I envision a future where lightweight devices within a home use SPV over
  WiFi to connect with a home server which in turn relays the transactions
  they create out to the larger and faster relays on the Internet.
 
  In a situation where there are hundreds or thousands of small SPV devices
  in a single home (if 21, Inc. is successful) monitoring the blockchain,
  this could result in lower traffic across the slow WAN connection.  And
  yes, I realize it could potentially take a LOT of these devices before
 the
  total bandwidth is greater than downloading a full copy of the
 blockchain,
  but there's other reasons to host your own full node -- trust being one.
 
  --
  *James G. Phillips IV*
  https://plus.google.com/u/0/113107039501292625391/posts
  http://www.linkedin.com/in/ergophobe
 
  *Don't bunt. Aim out of the ball park. Aim for the company of
 immortals.
  -- David Ogilvy*
 
   *This message was created with 100% recycled electrons. Please think
 twice
  before printing.*


 --
 One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud
 Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
 Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
 Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
 http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
 ___
 Bitcoin-development mailing list
 Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

--
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


Re: [Bitcoin-development] Zero-Conf for Full Node Discovery

2015-05-25 Thread Luke Dashjr
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 4:46:22 AM Kevin Greene wrote:
 This is something you actually don't want. In order to make it as difficult
 as possible for an attacker to perform a sybil attack, you want to choose a
 set of peers that is as diverse, and unpredictable as possible.

It doesn't hurt to have a local node or two, though. Might as well to improve 
propagation, while maintaining the other peers to avoid sybil attacks.

Luke

--
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


Re: [Bitcoin-development] Zero-Conf for Full Node Discovery

2015-05-25 Thread Matt Whitlock
This is very simple to do. Just ping the all nodes address (ff02::1) and try 
connecting to TCP port 8333 of each node that responds. Shouldn't take but more 
than a few milliseconds on any but the most densely populated LANs.


On Monday, 25 May 2015, at 11:06 pm, Jim Phillips wrote:
 Is there any work being done on using some kind of zero-conf service
 discovery protocol so that lightweight clients can find a full node on the
 same LAN to peer with rather than having to tie up WAN bandwidth?
 
 I envision a future where lightweight devices within a home use SPV over
 WiFi to connect with a home server which in turn relays the transactions
 they create out to the larger and faster relays on the Internet.
 
 In a situation where there are hundreds or thousands of small SPV devices
 in a single home (if 21, Inc. is successful) monitoring the blockchain,
 this could result in lower traffic across the slow WAN connection.  And
 yes, I realize it could potentially take a LOT of these devices before the
 total bandwidth is greater than downloading a full copy of the blockchain,
 but there's other reasons to host your own full node -- trust being one.
 
 --
 *James G. Phillips IV*
 https://plus.google.com/u/0/113107039501292625391/posts
 http://www.linkedin.com/in/ergophobe
 
 *Don't bunt. Aim out of the ball park. Aim for the company of immortals.
 -- David Ogilvy*
 
  *This message was created with 100% recycled electrons. Please think twice
 before printing.*

--
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


Re: [Bitcoin-development] Zero-Conf for Full Node Discovery

2015-05-25 Thread Jim Phillips
Do any wallets actually do this yet?
On May 25, 2015 11:37 PM, Matt Whitlock b...@mattwhitlock.name wrote:

 This is very simple to do. Just ping the all nodes address (ff02::1) and
 try connecting to TCP port 8333 of each node that responds. Shouldn't take
 but more than a few milliseconds on any but the most densely populated LANs.


 On Monday, 25 May 2015, at 11:06 pm, Jim Phillips wrote:
  Is there any work being done on using some kind of zero-conf service
  discovery protocol so that lightweight clients can find a full node on
 the
  same LAN to peer with rather than having to tie up WAN bandwidth?
 
  I envision a future where lightweight devices within a home use SPV over
  WiFi to connect with a home server which in turn relays the transactions
  they create out to the larger and faster relays on the Internet.
 
  In a situation where there are hundreds or thousands of small SPV devices
  in a single home (if 21, Inc. is successful) monitoring the blockchain,
  this could result in lower traffic across the slow WAN connection.  And
  yes, I realize it could potentially take a LOT of these devices before
 the
  total bandwidth is greater than downloading a full copy of the
 blockchain,
  but there's other reasons to host your own full node -- trust being one.
 
  --
  *James G. Phillips IV*
  https://plus.google.com/u/0/113107039501292625391/posts
  http://www.linkedin.com/in/ergophobe
 
  *Don't bunt. Aim out of the ball park. Aim for the company of
 immortals.
  -- David Ogilvy*
 
   *This message was created with 100% recycled electrons. Please think
 twice
  before printing.*

--
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


Re: [Bitcoin-development] Zero-Conf for Full Node Discovery

2015-05-25 Thread Kevin Greene
This is true, but the device doesn't know if the LAN it's on is a safe
network or a hotel wifi, for example. So there would be a tricky UX there.
You'd have to ask the user during set up if this is a trusted LAN or not;
or something like that. That may not be an issue though depending on the
nature of the product. For example, Chromecast doesn't need any security
protections against trolls on the same LAN. I guess it just depends on what
you're planning to build.

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Matt Whitlock b...@mattwhitlock.name
wrote:

 Who would be performing a Sybil attack against themselves? We're talking
 about a LAN here. All the nodes would be under the control of the same
 entity. In that case, you actually want them all connecting solely to a
 central hub node on the LAN, and the hub node should connect to diverse
 and unpredictable other nodes on the Bitcoin network.


 On Monday, 25 May 2015, at 9:46 pm, Kevin Greene wrote:
  This is something you actually don't want. In order to make it as
 difficult
  as possible for an attacker to perform a sybil attack, you want to
 choose a
  set of peers that is as diverse, and unpredictable as possible.
 
 
  On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 9:37 PM, Matt Whitlock b...@mattwhitlock.name
  wrote:
 
   This is very simple to do. Just ping the all nodes address (ff02::1)
 and
   try connecting to TCP port 8333 of each node that responds. Shouldn't
 take
   but more than a few milliseconds on any but the most densely populated
 LANs.
  
  
   On Monday, 25 May 2015, at 11:06 pm, Jim Phillips wrote:
Is there any work being done on using some kind of zero-conf service
discovery protocol so that lightweight clients can find a full node
 on
   the
same LAN to peer with rather than having to tie up WAN bandwidth?
   
I envision a future where lightweight devices within a home use SPV
 over
WiFi to connect with a home server which in turn relays the
 transactions
they create out to the larger and faster relays on the Internet.
   
In a situation where there are hundreds or thousands of small SPV
 devices
in a single home (if 21, Inc. is successful) monitoring the
 blockchain,
this could result in lower traffic across the slow WAN connection.
 And
yes, I realize it could potentially take a LOT of these devices
 before
   the
total bandwidth is greater than downloading a full copy of the
   blockchain,
but there's other reasons to host your own full node -- trust being
 one.
   
--
*James G. Phillips IV*
https://plus.google.com/u/0/113107039501292625391/posts
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ergophobe
   
*Don't bunt. Aim out of the ball park. Aim for the company of
   immortals.
-- David Ogilvy*
   
 *This message was created with 100% recycled electrons. Please think
   twice
before printing.*
  
  
  
 --
   One dashboard for servers and applications across
 Physical-Virtual-Cloud
   Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
   Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable
 Insights
   Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
   http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
   ___
   Bitcoin-development mailing list
   Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
   https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
  

--
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


Re: [Bitcoin-development] Zero-Conf for Full Node Discovery

2015-05-25 Thread Peter Todd
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:52:07AM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:
 On Monday, 25 May 2015, at 11:48 pm, Jim Phillips wrote:
  Do any wallets actually do this yet?
 
 Not that I know of, but they do seed their address database via DNS, which 
 you can poison if you control the LAN's DNS resolver. I did this for a 
 Bitcoin-only Wi-Fi network I operated at a remote festival. We had well over 
 a hundred lightweight wallets, all trying to connect to the Bitcoin P2P 
 network over a very bandwidth-constrained Internet link, so I poisoned the 
 DNS and rejected all outbound connection attempts on port 8333, to force all 
 the wallets to connect to a single local full node, which had connectivity to 
 a single remote node over the Internet. Thus, all the lightweight wallets at 
 the festival had Bitcoin network connectivity, but we only needed to backhaul 
 the Bitcoin network's transaction traffic once.

Interesting!

What festival was this?

-- 
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
03ce9f2f90736ab7bd24d29f40346057f9e217b3753896bb


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


[Bitcoin-development] Zero-Conf for Full Node Discovery

2015-05-25 Thread Jim Phillips
Is there any work being done on using some kind of zero-conf service
discovery protocol so that lightweight clients can find a full node on the
same LAN to peer with rather than having to tie up WAN bandwidth?

I envision a future where lightweight devices within a home use SPV over
WiFi to connect with a home server which in turn relays the transactions
they create out to the larger and faster relays on the Internet.

In a situation where there are hundreds or thousands of small SPV devices
in a single home (if 21, Inc. is successful) monitoring the blockchain,
this could result in lower traffic across the slow WAN connection.  And
yes, I realize it could potentially take a LOT of these devices before the
total bandwidth is greater than downloading a full copy of the blockchain,
but there's other reasons to host your own full node -- trust being one.

--
*James G. Phillips IV*
https://plus.google.com/u/0/113107039501292625391/posts
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ergophobe

*Don't bunt. Aim out of the ball park. Aim for the company of immortals.
-- David Ogilvy*

 *This message was created with 100% recycled electrons. Please think twice
before printing.*
--
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


Re: [Bitcoin-development] Zero-Conf for Full Node Discovery

2015-05-25 Thread Matt Whitlock
On Monday, 25 May 2015, at 11:48 pm, Jim Phillips wrote:
 Do any wallets actually do this yet?

Not that I know of, but they do seed their address database via DNS, which you 
can poison if you control the LAN's DNS resolver. I did this for a Bitcoin-only 
Wi-Fi network I operated at a remote festival. We had well over a hundred 
lightweight wallets, all trying to connect to the Bitcoin P2P network over a 
very bandwidth-constrained Internet link, so I poisoned the DNS and rejected 
all outbound connection attempts on port 8333, to force all the wallets to 
connect to a single local full node, which had connectivity to a single remote 
node over the Internet. Thus, all the lightweight wallets at the festival had 
Bitcoin network connectivity, but we only needed to backhaul the Bitcoin 
network's transaction traffic once.



 On May 25, 2015 11:37 PM, Matt Whitlock b...@mattwhitlock.name wrote:
 
  This is very simple to do. Just ping the all nodes address (ff02::1) and
  try connecting to TCP port 8333 of each node that responds. Shouldn't take
  but more than a few milliseconds on any but the most densely populated LANs.
 
 
  On Monday, 25 May 2015, at 11:06 pm, Jim Phillips wrote:
   Is there any work being done on using some kind of zero-conf service
   discovery protocol so that lightweight clients can find a full node on
  the
   same LAN to peer with rather than having to tie up WAN bandwidth?
  
   I envision a future where lightweight devices within a home use SPV over
   WiFi to connect with a home server which in turn relays the transactions
   they create out to the larger and faster relays on the Internet.
  
   In a situation where there are hundreds or thousands of small SPV devices
   in a single home (if 21, Inc. is successful) monitoring the blockchain,
   this could result in lower traffic across the slow WAN connection.  And
   yes, I realize it could potentially take a LOT of these devices before
  the
   total bandwidth is greater than downloading a full copy of the
  blockchain,
   but there's other reasons to host your own full node -- trust being one.
  
   --
   *James G. Phillips IV*
   https://plus.google.com/u/0/113107039501292625391/posts
   http://www.linkedin.com/in/ergophobe
  
   *Don't bunt. Aim out of the ball park. Aim for the company of
  immortals.
   -- David Ogilvy*
  
*This message was created with 100% recycled electrons. Please think
  twice
   before printing.*
 

--
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development