> Yes. I think this limitation could be removed. > A responding node can have – in theory – multiple identity-keys per > network interface (network interfaces is also confusing, because you > could run multiple bitcoind instances on the same interface with > different ports). > > The BIP should just make clear, that it is probably wise, to use > different identity-keys for each network interface (ipv4, v6, tor). >
I have updated that part of the BIP ----------- Each peer can configure multiple identity-keys (ECC, 32 bytes). Peers should make sure, each network interface (IPv4, IPv6, tor) has its own identity-key (otherwise it would be possible to link a tor address to a IPvX address). The identity-public-key(s) can be shared over a different channel with other node-operators (or non-validating clients) to grant authorized access. ----------- https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/compare/master...jonasschnelli:2016/07/auth_bip?expand=1 </jonas>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
