Re: [bitcoin-dev] testnet4

2019-06-17 Thread Emil Engler via bitcoin-dev
Indeed a large testnet blockchain has advantages too. But because it is the testnet and the testnet coins have no value, the blockchain could be 'spammed' after a reset for some days/weeks until it has a certain size. Could this be realistic solution ? Am 16.06.19 um 22:25 schrieb Peter Todd: >

Re: [bitcoin-dev] testnet4

2019-06-17 Thread Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev
On Sat, Jun 08, 2019 at 05:01:50PM +0200, Emil Engler via bitcoin-dev wrote: > I don't get why the testnet shouldn't be resetted just because there is a > (probably better) alternative for it. The testnet is still a thing and is > also used. Remember that the size of testnet itself is an

Re: [bitcoin-dev] New BIP - v2 peer-to-peer message transport protocol

2019-06-17 Thread Elichai Turkel via bitcoin-dev
Hi everyone, About the nonce being 64bit. (rfc7539 changed it to 96bit, which djb later calls xchacha) You suggest that we use the "message sequence number" as the nonce for Chacha20, Is this number randomly generate or is this a counter? And could it be reseted without rekeying? If it is