1 2017-10-02T00:12:34  *** jb55 has quit IRC
  2 2017-10-02T00:29:15  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  3 2017-10-02T00:33:17  *** wxxs has quit IRC
  4 2017-10-02T00:33:37  *** jb55 has quit IRC
  5 2017-10-02T00:54:50  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
  6 2017-10-02T00:58:38  <meshcollider> BlueMatt harding: if it's not stepping on anyone's toes (if you just want it up there asap), I can chuck up a PR in a bit for them?
  7 2017-10-02T01:00:10  <BlueMatt> meshcollider: if its not up yet I assume just go for it
  8 2017-10-02T01:00:27  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  9 2017-10-02T01:05:36  *** promag has quit IRC
 10 2017-10-02T01:11:58  *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 11 2017-10-02T01:12:23  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 12 2017-10-02T01:20:32  *** Z9036 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 13 2017-10-02T01:24:37  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 14 2017-10-02T01:25:43  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 15 2017-10-02T01:29:40  *** Z9036 has quit IRC
 16 2017-10-02T01:35:37  <meshcollider> ok its up, PR 440
 17 2017-10-02T01:59:05  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 18 2017-10-02T02:10:42  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 19 2017-10-02T02:17:24  *** goatpig has quit IRC
 20 2017-10-02T02:31:34  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 21 2017-10-02T02:36:22  *** promag has quit IRC
 22 2017-10-02T02:38:41  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 23 2017-10-02T02:54:24  *** chjj has quit IRC
 24 2017-10-02T03:12:51  *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 25 2017-10-02T03:22:19  *** Emcy has quit IRC
 26 2017-10-02T03:24:21  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 27 2017-10-02T03:27:48  *** Vortiago has quit IRC
 28 2017-10-02T03:29:25  *** Vortiago has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 29 2017-10-02T03:31:37  *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 30 2017-10-02T03:36:49  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 31 2017-10-02T03:55:13  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 32 2017-10-02T04:07:41  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 33 2017-10-02T04:12:40  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 34 2017-10-02T04:34:51  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 35 2017-10-02T05:22:09  *** chjj has quit IRC
 36 2017-10-02T05:22:50  *** pbase has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 37 2017-10-02T05:25:17  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
 38 2017-10-02T05:29:14  *** mtea994 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 39 2017-10-02T05:35:01  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
 40 2017-10-02T05:35:32  *** mtea994 has quit IRC
 41 2017-10-02T05:36:07  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 42 2017-10-02T05:42:35  *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 43 2017-10-02T05:52:45  *** intcat has quit IRC
 44 2017-10-02T05:56:45  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 45 2017-10-02T06:07:55  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 46 2017-10-02T06:54:03  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 47 2017-10-02T06:54:32  *** BashCo_ has quit IRC
 48 2017-10-02T06:57:50  *** promag has quit IRC
 49 2017-10-02T07:04:13  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 50 2017-10-02T07:06:34  *** owowo has quit IRC
 51 2017-10-02T07:07:56  *** promag has quit IRC
 52 2017-10-02T07:18:21  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 53 2017-10-02T07:46:38  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 54 2017-10-02T07:54:23  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 55 2017-10-02T07:59:15  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
 56 2017-10-02T08:18:12  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 57 2017-10-02T08:23:59  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 58 2017-10-02T08:24:57  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 59 2017-10-02T08:29:14  *** promag has quit IRC
 60 2017-10-02T08:30:52  *** alreadylate has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 61 2017-10-02T08:46:02  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 62 2017-10-02T08:53:50  <fanquake> wumpus I have some changes for the Windows builds notes ready, but can't seem to cherry-pick the commit out of 11244. If they push a commit with author info I'll grab that, otherwise will credit them in my commit message. Hopefully we'll have some clarity around the Windows build docs shortly..
 63 2017-10-02T09:01:07  *** dc0de has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 64 2017-10-02T09:22:38  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 65 2017-10-02T09:24:36  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 66 2017-10-02T09:26:41  *** Evel-Knievel has quit IRC
 67 2017-10-02T09:27:20  *** Evel-Knievel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 68 2017-10-02T09:28:01  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 69 2017-10-02T09:34:09  *** Evel-Knievel has quit IRC
 70 2017-10-02T09:36:50  *** Evel-Knievel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 71 2017-10-02T09:43:20  *** wxxs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 72 2017-10-02T10:10:01  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 73 2017-10-02T10:11:01  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
 74 2017-10-02T10:12:05  *** JackH has quit IRC
 75 2017-10-02T10:48:17  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
 76 2017-10-02T10:48:42  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 77 2017-10-02T10:49:05  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 78 2017-10-02T10:58:14  <meshcollider> Is there any permission level other than admin which can delete pages
 79 2017-10-02T10:58:24  <meshcollider> "Lead developer" and "Original Client developers" both redirect to a deleted page, so they should be deleted too
 80 2017-10-02T10:58:33  <meshcollider> Oops wrong channel
 81 2017-10-02T10:59:19  <meshcollider> Meant that for the wiki channel lol
 82 2017-10-02T11:10:57  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 83 2017-10-02T11:13:03  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
 84 2017-10-02T11:13:26  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 85 2017-10-02T11:14:31  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 86 2017-10-02T11:14:37  *** Shaun3811 has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 87 2017-10-02T11:14:50  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 88 2017-10-02T11:29:59  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #11437: [Docs] Update Windows build instructions for using WSL and Ubuntu 17.04 (master...windows-build-1704) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11437
 89 2017-10-02T11:30:18  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #11244: Docs: Add extra step to clean $PATH var to strip out windows %PATH% paths. (master...windows_build_fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11244
 90 2017-10-02T11:53:08  *** pbase has quit IRC
 91 2017-10-02T12:15:28  *** Oda has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 92 2017-10-02T12:17:27  *** dabura667 has quit IRC
 93 2017-10-02T12:20:05  *** Oda has quit IRC
 94 2017-10-02T12:26:20  *** intcat has quit IRC
 95 2017-10-02T12:28:26  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 96 2017-10-02T12:28:37  *** Oda_Nobunaga has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 97 2017-10-02T12:29:27  *** Oda_Nobunaga has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 98 2017-10-02T12:41:28  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e542728cde67...c641ccac5bd8
 99 2017-10-02T12:41:28  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master bb8376b Matt Corallo: Verify DBWrapper iterators are taking snapshots...
100 2017-10-02T12:41:29  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c641cca Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11422: qa: Verify DBWrapper iterators are taking snapshots...
101 2017-10-02T12:42:08  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11422: qa: Verify DBWrapper iterators are taking snapshots (master...2017-09-leveldb-check-snapshots) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11422
102 2017-10-02T12:43:35  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
103 2017-10-02T12:47:17  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c641ccac5bd8...10bee0dd4f37
104 2017-10-02T12:47:17  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d601f16 Anthony Towns: Fix invalid memory access in CScript::operator+=
105 2017-10-02T12:47:18  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 10bee0d Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11284: Fix invalid memory access in CScript::operator+= (guidovranken, ajtowns)...
106 2017-10-02T12:47:52  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11284: Fix invalid memory access in CScript::operator+= (guidovranken, ajtowns) (master...cscript_insert) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11284
107 2017-10-02T12:49:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/10bee0dd4f37...557aba6ce7da
108 2017-10-02T12:49:23  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 49f869f Johnson Lau: Fix bip68-sequence rpc test
109 2017-10-02T12:49:24  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 557aba6 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11399: Fix bip68-sequence rpc test...
110 2017-10-02T12:50:07  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11399: Fix bip68-sequence rpc test (master...bip68test-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11399
111 2017-10-02T12:55:11  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/557aba6ce7da...058c0f996b72
112 2017-10-02T12:55:12  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 92848e5 João Barbosa: Remove unused fTry from push_lock
113 2017-10-02T12:55:12  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 058c0f9 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11432: Remove unused fTry from push_lock...
114 2017-10-02T12:55:47  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11432: Remove unused fTry from push_lock (master...2017-08-clean-push-lock) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11432
115 2017-10-02T13:00:42  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
116 2017-10-02T13:05:11  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/058c0f996b72...c5c77bdcc632
117 2017-10-02T13:05:11  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3a4401a practicalswift: [Qt] Terminate string *pszExePath after readlink and without using memset
118 2017-10-02T13:05:12  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c5c77bd Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11193: [Qt] Terminate string *pszExePath after readlink and without using memset...
119 2017-10-02T13:05:40  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11193: [Qt] Terminate string *pszExePath after readlink and without using memset (master...null-terminate-after-readlink) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11193
120 2017-10-02T13:11:07  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c5c77bdcc632...339da9ca4143
121 2017-10-02T13:11:07  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5ddf560 Jim Posen: script: Change SignatureHash input index check to an assert....
122 2017-10-02T13:11:08  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 339da9c Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11411: script: Change SignatureHash input index check to an assert....
123 2017-10-02T13:11:39  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11411: script: Change SignatureHash input index check to an assert. (master...sighash-bounds-check) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11411
124 2017-10-02T13:23:09  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/339da9ca4143...90926db2381d
125 2017-10-02T13:23:10  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3336676 Akio Nakamura: Fix getchaintxstats()...
126 2017-10-02T13:23:11  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 07704c1 Akio Nakamura: Add some tests for getchaintxstats...
127 2017-10-02T13:23:11  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 90926db Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11021: [rpc] fix getchaintxstats()...
128 2017-10-02T13:23:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11021: [rpc] fix getchaintxstats() (master...fix_getchaintxstats) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11021
129 2017-10-02T13:25:52  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10457: Don't use fixed "wallet.bak"-filename during salvagewallet (master...2017/05/rename_bdb) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10457
130 2017-10-02T13:38:19  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
131 2017-10-02T13:39:27  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
132 2017-10-02T13:40:28  *** promag has quit IRC
133 2017-10-02T13:40:44  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
134 2017-10-02T13:53:02  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
135 2017-10-02T13:54:41  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
136 2017-10-02T13:55:29  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
137 2017-10-02T13:56:06  *** fanquake has quit IRC
138 2017-10-02T13:58:25  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
139 2017-10-02T13:58:53  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
140 2017-10-02T14:03:59  *** promag has quit IRC
141 2017-10-02T14:04:23  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
142 2017-10-02T14:06:43  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
143 2017-10-02T14:07:36  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
144 2017-10-02T14:15:32  *** unholymachine has quit IRC
145 2017-10-02T14:16:48  *** unholymachine has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
146 2017-10-02T14:16:56  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
147 2017-10-02T14:23:08  *** intcat has quit IRC
148 2017-10-02T14:23:09  *** dermoth has quit IRC
149 2017-10-02T14:24:15  *** wraithm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
150 2017-10-02T14:28:52  *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
151 2017-10-02T14:29:04  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
152 2017-10-02T14:43:41  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
153 2017-10-02T14:57:39  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
154 2017-10-02T15:13:24  *** jtimon has quit IRC
155 2017-10-02T15:38:42  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
156 2017-10-02T16:07:46  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
157 2017-10-02T16:13:53  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
158 2017-10-02T16:16:06  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
159 2017-10-02T16:17:57  *** promag has quit IRC
160 2017-10-02T16:20:05  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
161 2017-10-02T16:22:22  *** BashCo has quit IRC
162 2017-10-02T16:27:34  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
163 2017-10-02T16:29:07  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
164 2017-10-02T16:54:38  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
165 2017-10-02T16:55:23  *** alreadylate has quit IRC
166 2017-10-02T16:56:40  *** timothy has quit IRC
167 2017-10-02T16:59:13  *** jb55 has quit IRC
168 2017-10-02T17:09:31  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
169 2017-10-02T17:13:55  <wxxs> should 0.15 disconnect clients with version string /Satoshi:1.14.4(2X)/ ?
170 2017-10-02T17:15:25  <andytoshi> there's no point in having an arms race, if btc1 is going to masquerade as core then they'll masquerade as core
171 2017-10-02T17:15:50  <andytoshi> leaving the situation as-is at least means it's possible to identify them so individuals and businesses can manually patch them out if they cause problems
172 2017-10-02T17:18:07  <wxxs> so this is btc1 with the signal bit removed?
173 2017-10-02T17:19:18  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
174 2017-10-02T17:22:08  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
175 2017-10-02T17:29:19  <BlueMatt> wxxs: yea, btc1 decided to deliberately cause more harm to the network than neccessary, because they felt like trolling, I guess
176 2017-10-02T17:29:36  <BlueMatt> so if it didnt get disconencted, it was either a pre-version-bit version of btc1, or masquerading
177 2017-10-02T17:29:56  <BlueMatt> (or core with the version message changed to that)
178 2017-10-02T17:30:26  <wxxs> ew, I feel violated
179 2017-10-02T17:30:35  <BlueMatt> trolls gonna troll
180 2017-10-02T17:30:36  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
181 2017-10-02T17:32:55  <sipa> i don't think there is any particular problem with them not having the service bit for a while
182 2017-10-02T17:34:23  <sipa> (up until a bit before the fork, when they'll want preferential peering)
183 2017-10-02T17:35:32  <BlueMatt> sipa: I dont believe they've implemented any "week before, force service bit on" logic
184 2017-10-02T17:35:58  <BlueMatt> so that they can maximize network disruption and possible isolate some nodes
185 2017-10-02T17:38:06  <Murch> Luckily, if the node count stays like this, it'll be likely only disrupt their nodes.
186 2017-10-02T17:42:28  <BlueMatt> true, but it still seems needlessly stupid...the only reason to have that option is to troll, but, then, that seems to be what 2x is all about
187 2017-10-02T17:43:30  <Murch> of course it's stupid, but if they're being stupid and only hurting themselves, that's less of an issue than if they were being stupid and hurting others
188 2017-10-02T17:43:59  <wxxs> wouldn't they rather isolate their own nodes this way? Do the 2X CEOs know what their engineer is doing?
189 2017-10-02T17:44:24  <BlueMatt> well they're risking it - if some charitable person decides 2x doesnt have enough nodes so spins up some crazy sybil like we've seen with all the previous forks, they could cause issues for both themselves and others
190 2017-10-02T17:48:16  <gmaxwell> We need bad block interogation.
191 2017-10-02T17:49:00  <gmaxwell> Whenever we reject a bad block, we should remember it, and try fetching it from every other peer we connect to... and then ban any that serve it to us.
192 2017-10-02T17:49:14  *** abpa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
193 2017-10-02T17:49:25  <gmaxwell> Still won't prevent isolation from s2x nodes entirely but it would make it less bad.
194 2017-10-02T17:49:48  <BlueMatt> grrr, why didnt they fucking use the hardfork bit
195 2017-10-02T17:51:17  <gmaxwell> because that would minimize disruption.
196 2017-10-02T17:51:34  <BlueMatt> trolls gonna troll.....
197 2017-10-02T17:53:43  <wxxs> provocation?
198 2017-10-02T17:54:52  <gmaxwell> the whole strategy of s2x is to try to force people to accept their rule change by disrupting everything else.
199 2017-10-02T17:55:33  *** abpa has quit IRC
200 2017-10-02T17:57:38  *** abpa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
201 2017-10-02T17:59:51  <sturles> I suggest to just write a script which periodically scan getpeerinfo for 2x, then limit their bandwidth to a minimum where they will still stay connected.  I used to do that with BU, XT, etc.
202 2017-10-02T18:00:31  <sturles> They don't seem to thinkt that bandwidth can be a problem to anyone, so it shouldn't bother them.
203 2017-10-02T18:04:26  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
204 2017-10-02T18:10:59  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
205 2017-10-02T18:32:02  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
206 2017-10-02T18:38:29  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
207 2017-10-02T18:56:06  *** jb55 has quit IRC
208 2017-10-02T19:01:07  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
209 2017-10-02T19:01:52  *** chjj has quit IRC
210 2017-10-02T19:09:32  *** afk11 has quit IRC
211 2017-10-02T19:11:17  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
212 2017-10-02T19:11:42  <achow101> gmaxwell: I've been thinking about bad block interrogation. How would you be able to distinguish between they don't have the block, they didn't accept the block, and they're just taking a really long time to respond with the block?
213 2017-10-02T19:12:04  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
214 2017-10-02T19:14:10  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
215 2017-10-02T19:14:34  *** Argo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
216 2017-10-02T19:14:52  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
217 2017-10-02T19:15:25  <andytoshi> probably sufficient to send them a request for it, set a flag somewhere, and then if they ever reply with the block, ban them
218 2017-10-02T19:15:45  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
219 2017-10-02T19:16:30  <sipa> it could also be done based on headers
220 2017-10-02T19:16:56  <sipa> as long as difficulty rule isn't modified, we'll learn about all chains our peers have through the headers
221 2017-10-02T19:19:00  <gmaxwell> achow101: I don't think we need to.
222 2017-10-02T19:19:18  <gmaxwell> achow101: we ask for it.  ... and seperately anyone who ever sends it to use gets punted.
223 2017-10-02T19:19:25  <gmaxwell> we don't even have to track if we asked
224 2017-10-02T19:19:56  <gmaxwell> though sipa notes doing it through the header is even stronger and simpler.
225 2017-10-02T19:20:25  <achow101> gmaxwell: well right now we only ban the first person who relays us an invalid block. So I suppose we can just change that to ban anyone who relays us an invalid block regardless of whether we have already seen it
226 2017-10-02T19:20:47  <achow101> I was already thinking about just using headers. It can all be done in ProcessNewBlockHeaders I think
227 2017-10-02T19:20:56  *** ula has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
228 2017-10-02T19:21:03  <gmaxwell> achow101: yes, kind of, but if its burried when they connect they won't send it to us.
229 2017-10-02T19:22:12  <achow101> gmaxwell: if it's buried, couldn't we imitate IBD?
230 2017-10-02T19:22:42  <gmaxwell> I don't understand your question.
231 2017-10-02T19:23:16  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/90926db2381d...f199b8a33d94
232 2017-10-02T19:23:16  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 634e38c Anditto Heristyo: [Tests] Add Qt GUI tests to Overview and ReceiveCoin Page
233 2017-10-02T19:23:17  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f199b8a MarcoFalke: Merge #11365: [Tests] Add Qt GUI tests to Overview and ReceiveCoin Page...
234 2017-10-02T19:23:17  <gmaxwell> I don't think we need to in any case, ejecting any peers that has a header chain with a block we consider invalid is sufficient, and simpler than anything with fetching blocks.
235 2017-10-02T19:23:47  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #11365: [Tests] Add Qt GUI tests to Overview and ReceiveCoin Page (master...Adding-Qt-tests) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11365
236 2017-10-02T19:24:24  <achow101> so we can just ask a peer for the headers starting from block X where block X is invalid to us. If they respond with headers, then ban
237 2017-10-02T19:26:09  <achow101> by imitating IBD I meant doing the whole fetch 2000 headers thing starting from some block X and seeing if they responded to us with those headers
238 2017-10-02T19:27:08  *** afk11 has quit IRC
239 2017-10-02T19:28:22  <gmaxwell> well there are two degress of badness to think about, one is if their best chain contains a block we consider invalid and the other is if they accept a block we consider invalid at all even if its not in their best chain right now.
240 2017-10-02T19:29:34  <achow101> If a block is not in their best chain, we can't fetch it, no?
241 2017-10-02T19:29:52  <gmaxwell> we can, if it's not too far outside of it.
242 2017-10-02T19:30:27  <achow101> but if it is too far outside of the best chain, we can't determine whether they accepted it or not
243 2017-10-02T19:30:33  <gmaxwell> it avoids a case where it was on their best chain, they offered it to us, we attempted to fetch it... but were too slow.
244 2017-10-02T19:30:44  <gmaxwell> yes, if it's too far outside we can't, indeed.
245 2017-10-02T19:30:52  <achow101> unless we give them the block, but that risks getting us banned
246 2017-10-02T19:31:23  *** abpa has quit IRC
247 2017-10-02T19:31:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f199b8a33d94...8ddf60db7ad6
248 2017-10-02T19:31:54  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1088b53 Gregory Sanders: add functional test for mempoolreplacement command line arg
249 2017-10-02T19:31:55  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8ddf60d MarcoFalke: Merge #11407: [tests] add functional test for mempoolreplacement command line arg...
250 2017-10-02T19:31:58  <gmaxwell> But I don't think the too far limit is that limiting.
251 2017-10-02T19:32:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #11407: [tests] add functional test for mempoolreplacement command line arg (master...testmempoolreplacearg) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11407
252 2017-10-02T19:33:19  <achow101> the too far limit is one month.
253 2017-10-02T19:37:19  *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
254 2017-10-02T19:37:28  <achow101> I guess we can't cover the case where we are connected to an isolated peer that is following different consensus rules
255 2017-10-02T19:40:04  *** promag has quit IRC
256 2017-10-02T19:45:05  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
257 2017-10-02T19:46:27  *** r251d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
258 2017-10-02T19:46:35  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
259 2017-10-02T19:48:21  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
260 2017-10-02T19:51:44  <r251d> If a set of nodes wanted to protect against a 51% attack, they might collectively decide to invalidateblock on an attacking block. The coordination may be difficult, deciding whether a block constitutes an attack, but it may be helpful for the defending nodes to be able to reconsiderblock in some cases. In that scenario, the temporarily invalidated block may not be a bannable offense for nodes who
261 2017-10-02T19:51:44  <r251d>  relayed it.
262 2017-10-02T19:53:00  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
263 2017-10-02T19:53:40  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
264 2017-10-02T19:55:35  *** alreadylate has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
265 2017-10-02T20:01:15  *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
266 2017-10-02T20:03:52  *** RoyceX has quit IRC
267 2017-10-02T20:07:04  <gmaxwell> r251d: if it isn't your defence won't work well, because you'll invalidate that block but be surrounded by nothing but peers that have it, and so not even hear about the other chain.
268 2017-10-02T20:07:14  *** Oda_nobunaga has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
269 2017-10-02T20:07:28  <gmaxwell> so you're actually giving an argument for the importance of kicking off peers that have a block you consider invalid in their best chain.
270 2017-10-02T20:08:20  *** RoyceX has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
271 2017-10-02T20:08:30  <Oda_nobunaga> Yesterday Adam talked about "bunker mode" on slack: that is, if I understood well, a way to build the chain by selecting blocks sort of manually, and invalidating blocks from a suspected 51% attack?
272 2017-10-02T20:09:47  <r251d> I was hoping that a hypothetical "bunker mode" could keep connections with nodes that have alternative tips until social coordination decided on the best one to follow.
273 2017-10-02T20:10:09  *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
274 2017-10-02T20:10:34  <Oda_nobunaga> I was also wondering about the reaction to a 51% attack. How long would a PoW change take? Would we be talking hours or weeks?
275 2017-10-02T20:10:48  <Oda_nobunaga> I'm afraid that Jihan might use the threat of a reorg attack (very implicitly worded of course) as a way to sap confidence in the original chain, and scare people away from investing in it - thus deflating its price and possibly chasing more hash power away. The mere threat of an attack could work almost as well as an actual one.
276 2017-10-02T20:12:02  <sipa> please keep this channel about software development
277 2017-10-02T20:13:14  <Oda_nobunaga> Sorry, I was eager to get devs opinions about this. Perhaps this would be more suited for #bitcoin
278 2017-10-02T20:13:41  <mryandao> i was wondering if it would be possible to remove the libboost dependency for bitcoin-cli so it is possible to compile separately on a lightweight node with minimal libs.
279 2017-10-02T20:15:42  *** r251d has quit IRC
280 2017-10-02T20:17:08  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
281 2017-10-02T20:17:12  <achow101> mryandao: what does bitcoin-cli use boost for?
282 2017-10-02T20:17:31  <mryandao> that's exactly my question a week ago
283 2017-10-02T20:17:57  <mryandao> if you run `ldd` on it, you will see that bitcoin-cli requires libboost
284 2017-10-02T20:18:37  <achow101> oh, its for thread management
285 2017-10-02T20:20:53  *** Oda_nobunaga has quit IRC
286 2017-10-02T20:21:07  <achow101> and some of the things it includes requires boost
287 2017-10-02T20:22:40  <mryandao> ok, i see.
288 2017-10-02T20:23:11  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
289 2017-10-02T20:25:00  *** Argo_ has quit IRC
290 2017-10-02T20:26:33  *** RoyceX has quit IRC
291 2017-10-02T20:33:03  *** promag has quit IRC
292 2017-10-02T20:33:24  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
293 2017-10-02T20:42:09  *** alreadylate has quit IRC
294 2017-10-02T20:42:15  *** abpa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
295 2017-10-02T20:47:11  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipsorcery opened pull request #11438: Updated Windows build doc for WSL/Xenial workaround (master...wslbuilddoc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11438
296 2017-10-02T20:49:45  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
297 2017-10-02T20:51:22  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
298 2017-10-02T20:52:04  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
299 2017-10-02T20:53:00  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
300 2017-10-02T20:53:39  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
301 2017-10-02T20:54:04  *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
302 2017-10-02T21:03:34  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
303 2017-10-02T21:05:50  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
304 2017-10-02T21:06:28  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
305 2017-10-02T21:07:17  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
306 2017-10-02T21:10:14  *** alreadylate has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
307 2017-10-02T21:12:01  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
308 2017-10-02T21:15:01  *** abpa has quit IRC
309 2017-10-02T21:30:13  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #11439: [test] Refactor ZMQ test to use one address per notification type (master...2017-10-clean-zmq-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11439
310 2017-10-02T21:33:05  <promag> BlueMatt: ^
311 2017-10-02T21:33:34  *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
312 2017-10-02T21:34:10  <BlueMatt> promag: heh, I removed that commit
313 2017-10-02T21:36:03  <BlueMatt> promag: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11439#issuecomment-333672328
314 2017-10-02T21:41:24  <promag> BlueMatt: replied
315 2017-10-02T21:43:52  <BlueMatt> promag: does zmq not give you reliable order?
316 2017-10-02T21:45:17  <promag> AFAIK no, messages can be dropped
317 2017-10-02T21:45:25  <promag> but that's not the issue
318 2017-10-02T21:45:32  *** alreadylate has quit IRC
319 2017-10-02T21:46:06  <promag> the issue is that if we change the publishing order then we break the test (and other clients
320 2017-10-02T21:46:34  <BlueMatt> yes, thats my point, in common usage it seems to me that a client can vaguely rely on ordering
321 2017-10-02T21:46:38  <promag> that's why you needed to fix in the old commit
322 2017-10-02T21:46:40  <BlueMatt> who's to say clients dont rely on ordering today
323 2017-10-02T21:46:51  <BlueMatt> there are no docs, there is no API, so clients could be doing who-knows-what
324 2017-10-02T21:47:07  <promag> right
325 2017-10-02T21:47:12  <BlueMatt> a client would be entirely justified in assuming the ordering was part of the API
326 2017-10-02T21:47:32  <BlueMatt> so if we want to change that, we need to a) write some docs to begin with, b) document the change, with sufficient notice
327 2017-10-02T21:47:41  <BlueMatt> and until then, imo, the test should test order
328 2017-10-02T21:48:00  <BlueMatt> I realized this later based on sdaftuar complaining the lack of API, hence the commit removal
329 2017-10-02T21:48:02  <promag> So atm the PR is to prevent the test to fail and to be a better example on how to subscribe notifications
330 2017-10-02T21:48:10  <promag> > a client would be entirely justified in assuming the ordering was part of the API -- why?
331 2017-10-02T21:48:47  <BlueMatt> why not?
332 2017-10-02T21:48:50  <BlueMatt> it works, doesnt it?
333 2017-10-02T21:49:04  <BlueMatt> well my point is the test *should* fail if the interface changes
334 2017-10-02T21:49:34  <BlueMatt> a client, in the absense of any documentation whatsoever, would be justified in assuming the ordering was part of the api, imo
335 2017-10-02T21:50:52  *** Dizzle has quit IRC
336 2017-10-02T21:53:09  *** wraithm has quit IRC
337 2017-10-02T21:53:38  <promag> BlueMatt: it works, doesnt it? -- so? it's not documented as such it shouldn't be used as if it was
338 2017-10-02T21:54:14  <promag> if the interface changes - you didn't change the interface
339 2017-10-02T21:54:57  <BlueMatt> well then I'd prefer to rip out the whole thing...it wasnt documented so you shouldnt rely on it being there :p
340 2017-10-02T21:54:58  <promag> you changed some internals that changed the publishing order, but nothing is said about the order, only about the message contents
341 2017-10-02T21:55:17  <BlueMatt> nothing is said about the message contents, either
342 2017-10-02T21:55:23  <BlueMatt> nothing is said about any part of the interface
343 2017-10-02T21:55:24  *** afk11 has quit IRC
344 2017-10-02T21:55:27  <BlueMatt> its wholly undocumented
345 2017-10-02T21:55:50  <promag> doc/zmq.md ?
346 2017-10-02T21:56:50  <BlueMatt> sorry, it does say that you'll get messages, but it doesnt say why
347 2017-10-02T21:56:56  <BlueMatt> is hashblock just for new tips?
348 2017-10-02T21:56:58  <BlueMatt> or all blocks
349 2017-10-02T21:57:16  <BlueMatt> should you get a hashblock for something that was disconnected? what about something removed from your mempool?
350 2017-10-02T21:57:25  <promag> tip
351 2017-10-02T21:57:53  <BlueMatt> err, sorry, guess it does mention tip, doenst mention mempool, though, and in this case were talking about mempool
352 2017-10-02T21:57:59  <BlueMatt> those docs are useless
353 2017-10-02T21:58:42  <BlueMatt> it has 4 types of things, and afaict only mentions what happens in one of them
354 2017-10-02T21:59:02  <promag> so you suggest to improve the docs?
355 2017-10-02T21:59:20  <BlueMatt> see, eg, #9371
356 2017-10-02T21:59:22  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9371 | Notify on removal by morcos · Pull Request #9371 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
357 2017-10-02T22:00:03  <BlueMatt> I'd love to see someone actually document what in the hell the zmq stuff actually does, yes
358 2017-10-02T22:00:31  <BlueMatt> once we have such a doc, I think it'd be reasonable to deprecate certain behaviors being normative, eg the ordering restrictions
359 2017-10-02T22:00:32  <promag> later jonasschnelli added sequence which I believe is not documented (sorry if it is)
360 2017-10-02T22:00:51  <BlueMatt> its mentioned, but only in passing, no what the fuck format it has
361 2017-10-02T22:02:08  <promag> agree BlueMatt, I'll improve the doc
362 2017-10-02T22:02:36  <BlueMatt> I dont think we should remove ordering for a release or two, however
363 2017-10-02T22:04:40  <promag> I can split the PR in 2 - cleanup + remove-ordering
364 2017-10-02T22:04:48  <promag> create a 3rd improve-doc
365 2017-10-02T22:05:13  <BlueMatt> I dont think we should remove ordering until 0.17, assuming we have docs noting it is non-normative in 0.16
366 2017-10-02T22:05:21  <BlueMatt> (also cause there is no rush)
367 2017-10-02T22:05:57  <BlueMatt> we have no reason to need to remove ordering, and probably will keep the same ordering requirements in validationinterface
368 2017-10-02T22:06:01  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
369 2017-10-02T22:06:03  *** Deacyde has quit IRC
370 2017-10-02T22:08:16  <promag> From the client perspective, it should not rely on the order not because of bitcoind but because of zmq
371 2017-10-02T22:08:31  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
372 2017-10-02T22:09:02  <BlueMatt> are you sure zmq doesnt provide consistent ordering?
373 2017-10-02T22:09:06  <esotericnonsense> zmq is only guaranteed to preserve order over TCP
374 2017-10-02T22:09:13  <BlueMatt> you may lose messages but I'd assume in practice its ordered
375 2017-10-02T22:09:27  <BlueMatt> heh, ok, so in common-usage its guaranteed to preserve order :p
376 2017-10-02T22:09:45  <esotericnonsense> and only in the simple case with no proxies that may cause different paths to be taken by different messages
377 2017-10-02T22:10:00  <BlueMatt> <BlueMatt> heh, ok, so in common-usage its guaranteed to preserve order :p
378 2017-10-02T22:10:02  <esotericnonsense> hehe
379 2017-10-02T22:10:57  <promag> > probably will keep the same ordering requirements in validationinterface - where is this tested (beside in zmq)?
380 2017-10-02T22:11:27  <BlueMatt> stuff that calls into wallet is required, mostly
381 2017-10-02T22:11:38  <BlueMatt> depends on which calls zmq uses, I dont recall
382 2017-10-02T22:20:06  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
383 2017-10-02T22:20:08  <BlueMatt> do we have a standard for adding options to rpc calls now? we have named args, but also lots of stuff in options{} objects....do we prefer one for new things?
384 2017-10-02T22:27:16  <sipa> i prefer using named arguments over options - easier or equally easy to use
385 2017-10-02T22:27:36  <sipa> unless it's options that apply to only some arguments (like per-output options in createrawtransactions eg)
386 2017-10-02T22:28:20  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] TheBlueMatt opened pull request #11440: Fix validationinterface build on super old boost/clang (master...2017-10-cblock-validationinterface) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11440
387 2017-10-02T22:28:23  <gmaxwell> results in a terrible commandline expirence either way.
388 2017-10-02T22:30:42  *** promag has quit IRC
389 2017-10-02T22:31:47  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
390 2017-10-02T22:33:30  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
391 2017-10-02T22:34:07  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
392 2017-10-02T22:37:13  *** abpa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
393 2017-10-02T22:46:18  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
394 2017-10-02T22:54:24  *** abpa has quit IRC
395 2017-10-02T22:58:17  *** _flow_ has quit IRC
396 2017-10-02T22:58:47  *** timothy has quit IRC
397 2017-10-02T23:06:41  *** promag has quit IRC
398 2017-10-02T23:13:44  *** _flow_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
399 2017-10-02T23:17:30  *** dc0de has quit IRC
400 2017-10-02T23:18:49  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
401 2017-10-02T23:24:10  *** promag has quit IRC
402 2017-10-02T23:33:59  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
403 2017-10-02T23:40:28  *** afk11 has quit IRC
404 2017-10-02T23:46:05  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
405 2017-10-02T23:55:17  *** Ylbam has quit IRC