> Is 49 days particularly useful? Would it be a problem to instead leave both- > bits undefined? I'm thinking this might be better as a way to indicate "7 > days, plus a deterministically chosen set of historical blocks"…
I though two service bits allow three states and we should define all three combinations. But I guess an adequate „definition“ would be to reserve it for future „definitions“. Or use Gregory's proposal of min 2016*2 blocks & keep it „undefined“ for now. 49 days was chosen to allow SPV peers to be „offline“ for a month and still be capable to catch-up with a peer pruned to a datadir of ~10GB. > > This is technically true right now, but as soon as segwit activates, it will > no longer be... Therefore, I suggest striking it from the BIP, expounding on > it in greater detail, or making it true for the longer term. AFAIK Core does also guaranteed the 288 blocks post segwit activation: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/08a7316c144f9f2516db8fa62400893f4358c5ae/src/validation.h#L204 But maybe I’m confused. > >> Peers following this BIP SHOULD connect a limited amount of their available >> outbound connections to peers signaling one or both of the >> NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED_* service bits if they expect to request less blocks >> than the signaled number. > > This isn't entirely clear whether it refers to peers downloading blocks, or > peers serving them. (I assume the former, but it should be clarified.) Indeed. I’ll try to make that more clear. > >> Light clients (and such) who are not checking the nServiceFlags (service >> bits) from a relayed addr-message may unwillingly connect to a pruned peer >> and ask for (filtered) blocks at a depth below their pruned depth. > > Wouldn't this already be a problem, without the BIP? AFAIK, Core does currently only relay NODE_NETWORK addresses. But yes, It may be a problem already. </jonas>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
