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 1R4Xz8-0002gJ-Ea for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 12:57:38 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.214.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.47; envelope-from=joel.kaartinen@gmail.com; helo=mail-bw0-f47.google.com; Received: from mail-bw0-f47.google.com ([209.85.214.47]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1R4Xz4-0006Az-Na for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 12:57:38 +0000 Received: by bke11 with SMTP id 11so4688326bke.34 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 05:57:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.130.138 with SMTP id t10mr829844bks.10.1316177848209; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 05:57:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [85.78.81.98] (GGMKCCCXCVIII.gprs.sl-laajakaista.fi. [85.78.81.98]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t16sm6358202bkv.11.2011.09.16.05.57.24 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 16 Sep 2011 05:57:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Joel Joonatan Kaartinen To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: References: <4E71F6D6.2090208@justmoon.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 15:57:20 +0300 Message-ID: <1316177840.15775.15.camel@mei> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) 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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (joel.kaartinen[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 0.0 T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL To: misformatted and free email service X-Headers-End: 1R4Xz4-0006Az-Na Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Request review: drop misbehaving peers 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, 16 Sep 2011 12:57:38 -0000 > Darn good question. If the protection fails, would it be better for it > to 'fail hard', leaving people complaining "bitcoin won't stay > connected!" > > Or fail soft, so you at least have a couple of connections. > > I think fail hard is better-- we'll immediately know about the > problem, and can fix it. Fail soft makes me nervous because I think > that would make it more likely a bug splits the network (and, > therefore, the blockchain). My own preference would be to fail hard with detection of the problem and notification of the user if there's a GUI connected and/or running. - Joel