Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.3.24

[Matt Corallo <bitcoin-list@bluematt.me>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1775 bytes --]

Totally agree it really shouldnt be a vote, in the end UPnP is bad for
an individual (more bandwidth usage, etc), but good for the network.
That means people will vote against it, but in the end someone has to
make the tough decision and turn it on.

Also, bitcoind is prebuilt in the daemon folder on the download archives
(though Im not sure about OSX)

Matt
On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 12:47 -0500, Douglas Huff wrote:
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:35 AM, jan@uos.de wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 11:06:56AM -0400, Gavin Andresen wrote:
> >>> Not sure about OS differentiation, seems...wrong?  Maybe disabled by
> >>> default on bitcoind but on by default on bitcoin?
> >> 
> >> OK.  I mis-remembered the poll:
> >>   http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=4392.0
> >> 
> >> On by default	                       8 (20%)
> >> Off by default	                       22 (55%)
> >> On by default in the GUI, off by default in bitcoind	 10 (25%)
> > 
> > I just voted as well and now - with some extra votes in the meantime -
> > it's 9 / 22 / 13. So exactly 50/50 between off (22) and some form of on
> > (9 + 13).
> > 
> > I'm in favor of turning it on by default in the GUI and leaving it off
> > in bitcoind.
> > 
> > I don't like UPnP much, I find it exemplifies exactly what is wrong with
> > computer security today: Convenience trumps security almost every time.
> 
> I don't think this should be a vote at all. Given Greg/Matt's numbers it is a necessity to ensure network stability over the next 90 days.
> 
> Also: the default will only apply to pre-built binaries, which bitcoind isn't one of, so for people running bitcoind this default doesn't matter at all. Just continue building without UPNP support as you're already doing.


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]