public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] NODE_EXT_SERVICES and advertising related services
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 12:01:03 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANEZrP245242JYDBBo72XVmKgEBO96QPjcJi8Jy2Dm_r90n1Bw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJD+9qpwFcVfHOCCsFYjmk7A0V=65vG-7jJ6D7jj4Pi_7g@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1003 bytes --]

>
> He wants to use it to advertise services that are not part of the P2P
> protocol itself, but run on a different port. Reserving services bits
> for those is not acceptable.
>

Why not? Does the port matter much?


> All the NODE_EXT_SERVICES bit does is advertise the P2P "getextsrv"
> command to get information, such as the port to connect on, for the
> auxilary service.


Yes, I understand what it does, but from a clients perspective what it
means is if someone implements a useful service and exposes it this way you
have to seek out, connect to and interrogate every possible server even if
(say) only a handful actually provide it. The most there's >1 "ext service"
the protocol becomes extremely slow, vs service bits where you can download
addr packets and see which IPs are advertising which services.

I don't see much reason to take a potentially large performance hit when
there's a service advertisement mechanism that already works. What's wrong
with the existing mechanism exactly?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1544 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2014-08-08 10:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-08-08  3:38 [Bitcoin-development] NODE_EXT_SERVICES and advertising related services Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08  9:45 ` Mike Hearn
2014-08-08  9:56   ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 10:01     ` Mike Hearn [this message]
2014-08-08 10:15       ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 10:26         ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 10:41           ` Christian Decker
2014-08-08 11:22             ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 11:33       ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 11:38         ` Mike Hearn
2014-08-08 11:59           ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 12:06             ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 12:11             ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 12:15               ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 12:11             ` Mike Hearn
2014-08-08 12:15               ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 12:16               ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 12:34               ` Wladimir
2014-08-08 13:55                 ` Mike Hearn
2014-08-08 12:04           ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 12:13             ` Mike Hearn

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CANEZrP245242JYDBBo72XVmKgEBO96QPjcJi8Jy2Dm_r90n1Bw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=mike@plan99.net \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=laanwj@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox