From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1QpJAS-0007UT-L8 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:06:20 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bluematt.me designates 173.246.101.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=173.246.101.161; envelope-from=bitcoin-list@bluematt.me; helo=mail.bluematt.me; Received: from vps.bluematt.me ([173.246.101.161] helo=mail.bluematt.me) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1QpJAR-0005JX-Vp for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:06:20 +0000 Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:9ff2:1:ee55:f9ff:fec6:e666] (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:9ff2:1:ee55:f9ff:fec6:e666]) by mail.bluematt.me (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6438A2F19 for ; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 14:06:09 +0200 (CEST) From: Matt Corallo To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: <201108051258.25813.andyparkins@gmail.com> References: <201108041423.14176.andyparkins@gmail.com> <4E3B35E7.1010409@justmoon.de> <201108051258.25813.andyparkins@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-DOqTvrv+rygTeV2TOHZO" Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 14:06:09 +0200 Message-ID: <1312545969.4516.8.camel@BMThinkPad.lan.bluematt.me> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.9 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1QpJAR-0005JX-Vp Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Double spend detection to speed up transaction trust X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:06:20 -0000 --=-DOqTvrv+rygTeV2TOHZO Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 12:58 +0100, Andy Parkins wrote: > On 2011 August 05 Friday, Mike Hearn wrote: >=20 > I don't really see that "number of connections" is the relevant metric. Number of connections is something that needs serious thought. Too many and you fill everyone's connection slots and no one can make connections. Too few and you don't have a network but just a bunch of islands which would also cause serious problems. If you aren't relaying, each connection takes almost no bandwidth, so the question is how many do you need to be considered secure. --=-DOqTvrv+rygTeV2TOHZO Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJOO9ywAAoJEBrh01BD4I5UWtEQAJAD2hBrRyC2m8RZxU98wO0H 9d+N+3uihoB7O3bAb5bNKzS9d9U1BlktYyXeW2pCfFG9X0m1kHhqN8pc3aJzU97v afBxt+2ivy3D11rHvWnFBxIFdMKWCV8pifORZZHjDBNB5C9jDe3Ny7IL5lMGiZxM QLArTwh+n3gI0+5XZTAqEph/ND7gdE4izPiyZDY49N6iTYJXhH6S7Xb8qTDXsfg+ rXIBY7DN0ReM97fYkcXv3MVR304sWUFZ7G6wWepr+8dsZvcIH3NWtTfl/C8n/oJU Gelwo2+whEYrRIArUVVpmMl9fy/1DyjBPQVrRwFocMClQwlQbkt0bzf+SHLxjfzo M6Wb1qElH9xCDpQDKIG38X0wRMEmwScGarl8S1nBvCevmpn6NUZHk31KVP8e1fP/ yQeU2EoeLqTJqHbCzrZoX2uLEx9/62RBg8LMqvXHnX0c4/1WoeDYYzq8E/BmnO8j c4IyKIMorMMocmgMlP8B2x/R2Ypx6eCQOwQ3snUyBOrCfGz5Qw7nIdd/t95UthrR Xh4o0p+nxnb01UzDwYTxFOr8hzWINW3y5iaD29mQLNfSrTQ0LyZr67uc7L5Uk7YY 0XjyVHtiQkau/+ZOfQEAZXMk7wQ1oTq/9ySgcVxPxCQlV/PhLHtzP5/NiZqaIG25 0QHmWdfGNEftHgLbJTpv =sSFk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-DOqTvrv+rygTeV2TOHZO--