One point to add here is that, while V1 non-encrypted p2p traffic could be
compressed on a different OSI layer in theory, v2 encrypted traffic – due to
its pseudorandom nature – will likely have no size savings and thus need to be
compressed on the application layer with a proposal like this.
Hey Luke
I'd be happy to pick up working on BIP 3 again ([0], [1]) in light of this
issue and others that are repeatedly cropping up (e.g. confusion on the
recommended flow for working on proposed consensus changes, when to open a pull
request to bitcoin-inquisition, when to open a pull
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 04:47:33PM +, alicexbt via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Hi AJ,
>
> I like the idea and agree with everything you shared in the email except one
> thing:
>
> > So I'm switching inquisition over to having a dedicated "IANA"-ish
> > thing that's independent of BIP process
On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 05:29:48PM +, Michael Folkson via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Hey Luke
>
> I'd be happy to pick up working on BIP 3 again ([0], [1]) in light of this
> issue and others that are repeatedly cropping up (e.g. confusion on the
> recommended flow for working on proposed
Hi AJ,
I like the idea and agree with everything you shared in the email except one
thing:
> So I'm switching inquisition over to having a dedicated "IANA"-ish
> thing that's independent of BIP process nonsense. It's at:
>
> * https://github.com/bitcoin-inquisition/binana
I think "authority"
On 2024-01-16 16:42, Anthony Towns via bitcoin-dev wrote:
I'm switching inquisition over to having a dedicated "IANA"-ish
thing that's independent of BIP process nonsense. It's at:
* https://github.com/bitcoin-inquisition/binana
If people want to use it for bitcoin-related proposals that
Reposting this blog post here for discussion:
https://petertodd.org/2024/one-shot-replace-by-fee-rate
---
layout: post
title: "One-Shot Replace-by-Fee-Rate"
date: 2024-01-18
tags:
- bitcoin
- rbf
- pinning
---
Currently Bitcoin Core implements a Replace-by-Fee (RBF) policy, where
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 05:41:14AM -1000, David A. Harding via bitcoin-dev
wrote:
> Question: is there a recommended way to produce a shorter identifier for
> inline use in reading material? For example, for proposal
> BIN-2024-0001-000, I'm thinking:
>
> - BIN24-1 (references whatever the
Hello,
First off, apologies about my lack of participation. I am working on
mostly unrelated things and I'm afraid I have failed the community in
terms of what I can do on my end to keep the BIP process functional.
As such I am hereby resigning as BIP editor effective immediately.
Please remove
