Agree, thanks for the input Andrew. e
> On Mar 15, 2018, at 16:44, Andrew Chow <achow101-li...@achow101.com> wrote: > > I don't think the nodes that you are connecting to that have this behavior > are actually forked from Bitcoin Core. It seems more like fake nodes - nodes > that don't actually do any verification or follow the protocol. Such fake > nodes can set whatever user agent they want, common ones being Bitcoin Core's > user agents. > > IMO your best solution would be to drop peers for protocol noncompliance. > > Andrew > >> On 03/15/2018 05:17 AM, Eric Voskuil wrote: >> Thanks for the reply Andrew. I’ve reviewed the relevant Core sources and I >> do not see any problem. We have also synced against a Core node locally and >> not seen the problem. >> >> The reason I suspected it was Core is that it is very common and all of the >> User Agents are consistent (with an occasional exception for forked nodes). >> So there’s no easy way to determine what sort of nodes we are seeing. >> >> We tend to cycle through many more connections during sync than a Core node, >> so may just be seeing it more frequently, but I assume Core would log this >> behavior as well. Even so, seeing that wouldn’t help much. I’m as certain as >> I can be at this point that we are setting the flag and version correctly >> (and that we do not set bip37 filters). >> >> This behavior started infrequently with 0.14.0 peers and has become more >> common over time. Just wondering at this point what fork would report as >> Core and be that common? We used to drop peers that did this (for protocol >> noncompliance), and I’m considering reinstating that behavior. >> >> e >> >> On Mar 9, 2018, at 16:33, Andrew Chow via bitcoin-dev >> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> >>> Looking through the code, I don't think that this behavior has changed. Are >>> you sure that you are actually connected to Satoshi:0.15.0 nodes and not a >>> node that has simply set their user-agent to that (i.e. not a real >>> Satoshi:0.15.0 node)? >>> >>> If what you are seeing is true, it is likely a bug and not an intentional >>> change. In that case, can you provide specific details on how to reproduce? >>> >>> Andrew >>> >>>> On 03/09/2018 02:50 AM, Eric Voskuil via bitcoin-dev wrote: >>>> /Satoshi:0.15.0/ and later nodes appear to be no longer honoring the >>>> version.relay=false flag (BIP37). Could someone familiar with the change >>>> please explain the rational? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> e >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> bitcoin-dev mailing list >>>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> bitcoin-dev mailing list >>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
