From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1UYGdC-0006V6-Cd for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 03 May 2013 14:06:38 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.219.46 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.219.46; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f46.google.com; Received: from mail-oa0-f46.google.com ([209.85.219.46]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1UYGd9-0003RX-2z for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 03 May 2013 14:06:38 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id j6so1671275oag.33 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; Fri, 03 May 2013 07:06:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.56.36 with SMTP id x4mr2980059oep.25.1367589989760; Fri, 03 May 2013 07:06:29 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.167.169 with HTTP; Fri, 3 May 2013 07:06:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <CAPg+sBgz2pLOkc3WL1sG3pJpdVqUZRwEfO9YaC-62vQyWLLW2Q@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAPg+sBjSe23eADMxu-1mx0Kg2LGkN+BSNByq0PtZcMxAMh0uTg@mail.gmail.com> <CANEZrP3FA-5z3gAC1aYbG2EOKM2eDyv7zX3S9+ia2ZJ0LPkKiA@mail.gmail.com> <CAPg+sBjz8SbqU=2YXrXzwzmvz+NUbokD6KbPwZ5QAXSqCdi++g@mail.gmail.com> <CANEZrP2X9A0kBvN8=+G+dn_uqbSYfNhw7dm4od_yfJqDUoxHWg@mail.gmail.com> <CAPg+sBgz2pLOkc3WL1sG3pJpdVqUZRwEfO9YaC-62vQyWLLW2Q@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 16:06:29 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ojeJgYIMm2beNJHzeDTf-vCWUDc Message-ID: <CANEZrP2aaOyv4U12-moux--OhZQdK7rXC24YN61o6LQ0a+bK6g@mail.gmail.com> From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> To: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c249f689cce604dbd0db85 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) 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 (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 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 X-Headers-End: 1UYGd9-0003RX-2z Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Service bits for pruned nodes X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 May 2013 14:06:38 -0000 --001a11c249f689cce604dbd0db85 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > Yes, I like that better than broadcasting the exact height starting at > which you serve (though I would put that information immediately in the > version announcement). I don't think we can rely on the addr broadcasting > mechanism for fast information exchange anyway. One more problem with this: > DNS seeds cannot convey this information (neither do they currently convey > service bits, but at least those can be indexed separately, and served > explicitly through asking for a specific subdomain or so). > That's true, but we can extend the DNS seeding protocol a little bit - you could query <current-chain-height>.dnsseed.whatever.com and the DNS server then only returns nodes it knows matches your requirement. This might complicate existing seeds a bit, and it's a bit of a hack, but protocol-wise it's still possible. Of course if you want to add more dimensions it gets uglier fast. --001a11c249f689cce604dbd0db85 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div= >=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;b= order-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"= gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"> <div>Yes, I like that better than broadcasting the exact height starting at= which you serve (though I would put that information immediately in the ve= rsion announcement). I don't think we can rely on the addr broadcasting= mechanism for fast information exchange anyway. One more problem with this= : DNS seeds cannot convey this information (neither do they currently conve= y service bits, but at least those can be indexed separately, and served ex= plicitly through asking for a specific subdomain or so).</div> </div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>That's true, b= ut we can extend the DNS seeding protocol a little bit - you could query &l= t;current-chain-height>.<a href=3D"http://dnsseed.whatever.com">dnsseed.= whatever.com</a> and the DNS server then only returns nodes it knows matche= s your requirement.</div> <div style><br></div><div style>This might complicate existing seeds a bit,= and it's a bit of a hack, but protocol-wise it's still possible. O= f course if you want to add more dimensions it gets uglier fast.</div><div> =C2=A0<br></div></div></div></div> --001a11c249f689cce604dbd0db85--