This sounds like something that should be written up as a BIP and use a
normal service bit assignment...?
Luke
On 3/2/23 01:55, kcalvinalvin via bitcoin-dev wrote:
Hello all,
Wanted to tell the mailing list that I'll be using service bit 24 (1
<< 24) to signal that nodes are Utreexo capable nodes on testnet and
signet as requested by the comment in protocol.h in
bitcoind (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/74981aa02d2b14ad1c0b82d1eb09cf3169eaa8ae/src/protocol.h#L295-L301).
There are plans to release binaries for the utreexo node
(github.com/utreexo/utreexod) in the next few months so that power
users can try it out. I have no plans to release binaries for mainnet
yet.
Do let me know if someone else is using the same bit to signal for
something else and we can coordinate accordingly.
Best,
Calvin
_______________________________________________
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
