On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgar...@bitpay.com> wrote: > One general problem is that security is weakened when an attacker can DoS a > small part of the chain by DoS'ing a small number of nodes - yet the impact > is a network-wide DoS because nobody can complete a sync.
It might be more interesting to think of that attack as a bandwidth exhaustion DOS attack on the archive nodes... if you can't get a copy without them, thats where you'll go. So the question arises: does the option make some nodes that would have been archive not be? Probably some-- but would it do so much that it would offset the gain of additional copies of the data when those attacks are not going no. I suspect not. It's also useful to give people incremental ways to participate even when they can't swollow the whole pill; or choose to provide the resource thats cheap for them to provide. In particular, if there is only two kinds of full nodes-- archive and pruned; then the archive nodes take both a huge disk and bandwidth cost; where as if there are fractional then archives take low(er) bandwidth unless the fractionals get DOS attacked. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
