12019-07-18T00:00:02  *** Guest40772 has quit IRC
  22019-07-18T00:01:33  *** elichai2 has quit IRC
  32019-07-18T00:04:07  *** martind1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  42019-07-18T00:08:29  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
  52019-07-18T00:28:23  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
  62019-07-18T00:37:57  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
  72019-07-18T00:49:22  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  82019-07-18T00:53:10  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  92019-07-18T00:56:21  *** elichai2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 102019-07-18T00:57:47  *** Dean_Guss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 112019-07-18T00:59:09  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 122019-07-18T01:02:25  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 132019-07-18T01:05:53  *** justan0theruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 142019-07-18T01:07:14  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 152019-07-18T01:22:51  *** peleion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 162019-07-18T01:31:11  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
 172019-07-18T01:48:22  *** captjakk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 182019-07-18T01:51:59  *** justan0theruser is now known as justanotheruser
 192019-07-18T01:55:54  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
 202019-07-18T02:01:08  *** Honethe_ has quit IRC
 212019-07-18T02:05:41  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 222019-07-18T02:05:42  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/459baa1756b7...0515406acb5d
 232019-07-18T02:05:42  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6a7a70b Jon Atack: test: enable passing wildcards with path to test runner
 242019-07-18T02:05:43  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e142ee0 Jon Atack: doc: describe how to pass wildcard names to test runner
 252019-07-18T02:05:44  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 0515406 fanquake: Merge #16374: test: Enable passing wildcard test names to test runner from...
 262019-07-18T02:05:45  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 272019-07-18T02:06:39  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 282019-07-18T02:06:39  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #16374: test: Enable passing wildcard test names to test runner from root (master...enable-passing-wildcard-files-to-test-runner-from-root) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16374
 292019-07-18T02:06:42  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 302019-07-18T02:12:28  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 312019-07-18T02:45:29  *** Dean_Guss has quit IRC
 322019-07-18T02:46:46  *** Dean_Guss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 332019-07-18T02:47:36  *** mryandao has quit IRC
 342019-07-18T02:47:49  *** ghost43_ has quit IRC
 352019-07-18T02:48:08  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 362019-07-18T02:48:10  *** mryandao has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 372019-07-18T02:49:15  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 382019-07-18T02:49:57  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 392019-07-18T02:50:24  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
 402019-07-18T03:00:02  *** martind1 has quit IRC
 412019-07-18T03:04:01  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 422019-07-18T03:04:03  *** pdurbin1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 432019-07-18T03:06:28  <fanquake> promag: can you check my understanding in 16405
 442019-07-18T03:35:13  *** scoop has quit IRC
 452019-07-18T03:41:33  *** elichai2 has quit IRC
 462019-07-18T03:44:50  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 472019-07-18T03:50:27  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 482019-07-18T03:51:35  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 492019-07-18T04:14:09  *** captjakk has quit IRC
 502019-07-18T04:21:22  *** byroe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 512019-07-18T04:21:59  *** scoop has quit IRC
 522019-07-18T04:29:06  *** byroe has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 532019-07-18T04:41:36  *** queip has quit IRC
 542019-07-18T04:48:33  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 552019-07-18T05:02:54  <kallewoof> luke-jr: are you around to give feedback/potential number assignment to/of https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/803 ?
 562019-07-18T05:12:12  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 572019-07-18T05:12:12  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kallewoof opened pull request #16411: Signet support (master...signet) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16411
 582019-07-18T05:12:15  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 592019-07-18T05:30:56  *** teardown has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 602019-07-18T05:45:20  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 612019-07-18T05:49:36  *** scoop has quit IRC
 622019-07-18T06:00:02  *** pdurbin1 has quit IRC
 632019-07-18T06:00:16  *** DeanWeen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 642019-07-18T06:02:44  *** Dean_Guss has quit IRC
 652019-07-18T06:04:38  *** gchaix has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 662019-07-18T06:16:17  *** Guest35617 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 672019-07-18T06:29:31  *** harrigan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 682019-07-18T06:31:50  *** Taborlin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 692019-07-18T06:32:54  *** d_t has quit IRC
 702019-07-18T06:40:02  *** Taborlin has quit IRC
 712019-07-18T06:51:03  *** harrigan has quit IRC
 722019-07-18T06:52:53  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
 732019-07-18T06:53:03  *** hardforkthis has quit IRC
 742019-07-18T06:53:18  *** hardforkthis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 752019-07-18T06:59:07  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 762019-07-18T07:06:47  *** hardforkthis has quit IRC
 772019-07-18T07:10:24  *** hardforkthis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 782019-07-18T07:12:31  *** d_t has quit IRC
 792019-07-18T07:16:39  *** harrigan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 802019-07-18T07:21:01  *** rh0nj has quit IRC
 812019-07-18T07:22:45  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 822019-07-18T07:24:08  *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 832019-07-18T07:31:13  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 842019-07-18T07:31:19  *** d_t has quit IRC
 852019-07-18T07:32:03  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 862019-07-18T07:37:04  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 872019-07-18T07:44:00  *** jungly has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 882019-07-18T07:52:03  *** queip has quit IRC
 892019-07-18T07:59:30  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 902019-07-18T08:05:23  *** setpill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 912019-07-18T08:26:08  *** niska has quit IRC
 922019-07-18T08:27:34  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 932019-07-18T08:34:21  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 942019-07-18T08:34:26  *** schnerchi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 952019-07-18T08:36:36  *** niska has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 962019-07-18T08:36:46  *** kljasdfvv has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 972019-07-18T08:45:01  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 982019-07-18T08:46:06  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 992019-07-18T08:52:39  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1002019-07-18T09:00:01  *** gchaix has quit IRC
1012019-07-18T09:04:39  *** j3parker1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1022019-07-18T09:08:54  *** Krellan has quit IRC
1032019-07-18T09:10:31  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
1042019-07-18T09:19:25  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1052019-07-18T09:26:34  *** queip has quit IRC
1062019-07-18T09:27:25  *** belcher has quit IRC
1072019-07-18T09:32:45  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
1082019-07-18T09:33:49  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1092019-07-18T09:33:58  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1102019-07-18T09:38:39  *** Honethe_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1112019-07-18T09:45:33  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1122019-07-18T09:45:43  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1132019-07-18T09:50:40  *** scoop has quit IRC
1142019-07-18T09:56:48  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
1152019-07-18T09:58:41  *** luc__ has quit IRC
1162019-07-18T10:02:27  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1172019-07-18T10:06:34  *** jonatack has quit IRC
1182019-07-18T10:07:23  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1192019-07-18T10:14:32  *** vincenzopalazzo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202019-07-18T10:16:09  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1212019-07-18T10:16:14  *** vincenzopalazzo has quit IRC
1222019-07-18T10:19:18  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1232019-07-18T10:28:15  *** vincenzopalazzo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1242019-07-18T10:31:04  *** jb55 has quit IRC
1252019-07-18T10:31:27  *** vincenzopalazzo has quit IRC
1262019-07-18T10:37:55  *** jonatack has quit IRC
1272019-07-18T10:48:34  *** Krellan has quit IRC
1282019-07-18T10:51:20  *** queip has quit IRC
1292019-07-18T10:57:00  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1302019-07-18T11:01:18  *** Honethe_ has quit IRC
1312019-07-18T11:18:55  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1322019-07-18T11:18:55  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] tecnovert opened pull request #16412: net: Make poll in InterruptibleRecv only filter for POLLIN events. (master...bitcoin-poll) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16412
1332019-07-18T11:18:56  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1342019-07-18T11:21:51  *** niska has quit IRC
1352019-07-18T11:22:09  *** niska has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1362019-07-18T11:22:31  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
1372019-07-18T11:23:07  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1382019-07-18T11:25:30  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
1392019-07-18T11:32:18  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1402019-07-18T11:39:23  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
1412019-07-18T11:47:01  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1422019-07-18T11:58:46  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1432019-07-18T11:58:46  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0515406acb5d...65d12110d43a
1442019-07-18T11:58:46  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a981e74 João Barbosa: fix: tor: Call event_base_loopbreak from the event's callback
1452019-07-18T11:58:47  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 65d1211 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #16405: fix: tor: Call event_base_loopbreak from the event's callbac...
1462019-07-18T11:58:48  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1472019-07-18T11:59:56  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1482019-07-18T11:59:56  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #16405: fix: tor: Call event_base_loopbreak from the event's callback (master...2019-07-fix-break-before-dispatch) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16405
1492019-07-18T11:59:57  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1502019-07-18T12:00:01  *** j3parker1 has quit IRC
1512019-07-18T12:05:46  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1522019-07-18T12:13:17  *** [LE] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1532019-07-18T12:13:19  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1542019-07-18T12:16:22  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1552019-07-18T12:16:27  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
1562019-07-18T12:17:37  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1572019-07-18T12:18:59  *** vincenzopalazzo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1582019-07-18T12:21:03  *** vincenzopalazzo has quit IRC
1592019-07-18T12:23:21  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1602019-07-18T12:23:21  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] THETCR opened pull request #16413: depends: Bump QT to LTS release 5.9.8 (master...qt-lts) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16413
1612019-07-18T12:23:25  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1622019-07-18T12:27:15  *** brianhoffman has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1632019-07-18T12:28:06  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1642019-07-18T12:28:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/65d12110d43a...e5abb59a9a66
1652019-07-18T12:28:07  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ae311bc Hennadii Stepanov: Fix autostart filenames on Linux
1662019-07-18T12:28:07  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e5abb59 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #16379: Fix autostart filenames on Linux for testnet/regtest
1672019-07-18T12:28:09  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1682019-07-18T12:29:06  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1692019-07-18T12:29:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #16379: Fix autostart filenames on Linux for testnet/regtest (master...20190712-fix-autostart) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16379
1702019-07-18T12:29:07  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1712019-07-18T12:39:35  *** etwert has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1722019-07-18T12:41:02  *** Krellan has quit IRC
1732019-07-18T12:53:09  *** harrigan has quit IRC
1742019-07-18T12:59:58  *** zivl has quit IRC
1752019-07-18T13:04:27  <MarcoFalke> #proposedmeetingtopic  Remove mempool expiry, treat txs as replaceable instead #16409
1762019-07-18T13:04:28  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16409 | Remove mempool expiry, treat txs as replaceable instead by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #16409 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1772019-07-18T13:04:37  <MarcoFalke> #proposedmeetingtopic 0.18.1
1782019-07-18T13:05:51  *** harrigan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1792019-07-18T13:06:33  <fanquake> Don't think I'll be at the meeting, but ACK kicking off 0.18.1
1802019-07-18T13:06:40  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1812019-07-18T13:06:40  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to 0.18: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/410774ab89fd...3f76160087c0
1822019-07-18T13:06:41  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.18 b2711b9 João Barbosa: fix: tor: Call event_base_loopbreak from the event's callback
1832019-07-18T13:06:42  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.18 3f76160 fanquake: Merge #16406: 0.18: fix: tor: Call event_base_loopbreak from the event's c...
1842019-07-18T13:06:43  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1852019-07-18T13:07:00  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1862019-07-18T13:07:00  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #16406: 0.18: fix: tor: Call event_base_loopbreak from the event's callback (0.18...2019-07-backport-16405) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16406
1872019-07-18T13:07:01  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1882019-07-18T13:19:36  *** Aaronvan_ is now known as AaronvanW
1892019-07-18T13:22:41  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1902019-07-18T13:23:11  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
1912019-07-18T13:30:45  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1922019-07-18T13:41:24  *** elichai2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1932019-07-18T13:50:28  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1942019-07-18T13:52:00  <promag> regarding 0.18.1, just to be clear, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13339#issuecomment-504653790 is a no go?
1952019-07-18T13:53:21  <promag> we already have "experimental" features and IMHO the lack of this feature invalidates some multi wallet usages
1962019-07-18T13:54:11  <sdaftuar> #proposedmeetingtopic -blocksonly not being a hidden option in 0.18.1
1972019-07-18T13:54:33  *** zivl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1982019-07-18T13:55:02  *** d_t has quit IRC
1992019-07-18T14:00:41  *** luc__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2002019-07-18T14:04:50  *** luc__ has quit IRC
2012019-07-18T14:05:32  <wumpus> please, let's try to cut 0.18.1 at some point
2022019-07-18T14:05:35  <wumpus> and not keep adding things t oit
2032019-07-18T14:06:08  <promag> just asking, again :P
2042019-07-18T14:07:28  <promag> what about #16322
2052019-07-18T14:07:30  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16322 | wallet: Fix -maxtxfee check by moving it to CWallet::CreateTransaction by promag · Pull Request #16322 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2062019-07-18T14:08:20  <promag> is has "Needs backport"
2072019-07-18T14:09:00  <promag> it's not a clean backport
2082019-07-18T14:09:10  <promag> (by far)
2092019-07-18T14:09:25  <wumpus> ok, maybe it can wait until 0.18.2 then
2102019-07-18T14:09:45  <promag> +1
2112019-07-18T14:09:49  <MarcoFalke> Wat?
2122019-07-18T14:10:04  <promag> I mean I agree
2132019-07-18T14:10:08  <MarcoFalke> I don't
2142019-07-18T14:10:19  <promag> ok then :D
2152019-07-18T14:10:31  <MarcoFalke> Users are throwing away coins due to a bug in our software
2162019-07-18T14:10:32  <wumpus> ok, 0.18.1 plans for today are off...
2172019-07-18T14:10:49  <wumpus> *resets tree*
2182019-07-18T14:11:01  <MarcoFalke> sorry :(
2192019-07-18T14:11:39  <promag> backporting that requires some refactors
2202019-07-18T14:11:50  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2212019-07-18T14:11:53  <MarcoFalke> promag: Would the backport be clean if you also cherry picked the change where the txerros are moved to the new file?
2222019-07-18T14:11:53  <promag> or rewrite the fix in 0.17 without those refactors
2232019-07-18T14:12:06  <wumpus> it's a compromise with how bad the current bugs are that require the 0.18.1 release in the first place, if you think this bug is *much worse* than what the fixed already in it fix, well then it makes sense to wait
2242019-07-18T14:12:07  <promag> i mean 0.18
2252019-07-18T14:12:25  <wumpus> if not, it just exposes users to other bugs for longer
2262019-07-18T14:12:50  <promag> MarcoFalke: I'll have to check that
2272019-07-18T14:13:12  <MarcoFalke> The maxtxfee is not a regression. I has existed for all time, I think. I am glad that promag finally fixed it
2282019-07-18T14:14:08  <wumpus> I'm also glad that he fixed it, don't get me wrong
2292019-07-18T14:14:14  <promag> it depends on #15778 and #15638
2302019-07-18T14:14:17  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15778 | [wallet] Move maxtxfee from node to wallet by jnewbery · Pull Request #15778 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2312019-07-18T14:14:20  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15638 | Move-only: Pull wallet code out of libbitcoin_server by ryanofsky · Pull Request #15638 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2322019-07-18T14:14:21  <wumpus> *hasty last minute difficult backport* just sounds risky to me
2332019-07-18T14:14:25  <promag> amd #16257
2342019-07-18T14:14:28  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16257 | [wallet] abort when attempting to fund a transaction above -maxtxfee by Sjors · Pull Request #16257 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2352019-07-18T14:15:41  <wumpus> if it was a clean merge there would be no argument I think
2362019-07-18T14:15:57  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2372019-07-18T14:16:49  <promag> this sounds too much to backport. actually I've tried but at some point I gave up because of the required changes
2382019-07-18T14:17:40  <promag> but the real fix Marco mentions is to check maxtxfee in CreateTransaction, this could be implemented I guess
2392019-07-18T14:18:04  <wumpus> a subset of the fix that solves the worst issue would do
2402019-07-18T14:18:08  <wumpus> especially if easy to review
2412019-07-18T14:18:52  <promag> this -> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16322/files#diff-b2bb174788c7409b671c46ccc86034bdR3125
2422019-07-18T14:19:05  <promag> and the tests
2432019-07-18T14:20:32  <wumpus> the tests don't have the sameconcerns, backport as much refactors as you need there
2442019-07-18T14:31:23  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2452019-07-18T14:34:46  *** Krellan has quit IRC
2462019-07-18T14:35:18  <wumpus> looks like #16412 needs to hold up 0.18.1 too
2472019-07-18T14:35:20  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16412 | net: Make poll in InterruptibleRecv only filter for POLLIN events. by tecnovert · Pull Request #16412 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2482019-07-18T14:36:35  *** hexyul has quit IRC
2492019-07-18T14:36:50  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2502019-07-18T14:37:47  *** jonatack has quit IRC
2512019-07-18T14:39:01  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2522019-07-18T14:40:27  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
2532019-07-18T14:42:15  *** hexyul has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2542019-07-18T14:45:22  *** scoop has quit IRC
2552019-07-18T14:46:46  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2562019-07-18T14:54:12  *** hebasto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2572019-07-18T14:56:17  *** Honthe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2582019-07-18T14:58:54  *** harrigan has quit IRC
2592019-07-18T15:00:02  *** [LE] has quit IRC
2602019-07-18T15:10:48  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2612019-07-18T15:16:33  *** setpill has quit IRC
2622019-07-18T15:17:58  *** scoop has quit IRC
2632019-07-18T15:18:17  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2642019-07-18T15:18:37  *** DrGuschtel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2652019-07-18T15:23:44  <wumpus> sdaftuar: ok, I see #15990 has been backported to 0.18.1, the intent of your meeting topic is whether it should be hidden again?
2662019-07-18T15:23:47  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15990 | Add tests and documentation for blocksonly by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #15990 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2672019-07-18T15:25:04  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2682019-07-18T15:25:08  *** michaels_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2692019-07-18T15:25:28  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
2702019-07-18T15:25:37  *** ExEric3 has quit IRC
2712019-07-18T15:28:23  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
2722019-07-18T15:30:24  *** harrigan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2732019-07-18T15:30:42  *** harrigan has quit IRC
2742019-07-18T15:38:32  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2752019-07-18T15:45:48  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2762019-07-18T15:45:48  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #16414: 0.18: wallet: Fix -maxtxfee check by moving it to CWallet::CreateTransaction (0.18...2019-07-backport-16322) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16414
2772019-07-18T15:45:49  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2782019-07-18T15:45:52  *** jtimon has quit IRC
2792019-07-18T15:46:13  *** Emilstud has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2802019-07-18T15:47:16  *** Krellan has quit IRC
2812019-07-18T15:48:49  *** emilengler has quit IRC
2822019-07-18T15:49:57  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2832019-07-18T15:58:43  *** emilengler has quit IRC
2842019-07-18T15:58:48  <promag> MarcoFalke: wumpus: wip backport ^
2852019-07-18T15:59:09  <promag> let me know if I should squash
2862019-07-18T16:04:11  <kallewoof> I would like to request that #16411 is added to Chasing Concept ACK (will probably crash before meeting starts).
2872019-07-18T16:04:13  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16411 | Signet support by kallewoof · Pull Request #16411 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2882019-07-18T16:10:24  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2892019-07-18T16:10:49  *** elichai2 has quit IRC
2902019-07-18T16:13:41  *** emilengler has quit IRC
2912019-07-18T16:19:39  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2922019-07-18T16:24:02  *** Krellan has quit IRC
2932019-07-18T16:25:16  *** DeanWeen has quit IRC
2942019-07-18T16:27:30  *** michaels_ has quit IRC
2952019-07-18T16:28:41  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2962019-07-18T16:31:37  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2972019-07-18T16:34:59  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2982019-07-18T16:37:58  *** Krellan has quit IRC
2992019-07-18T16:39:48  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3002019-07-18T16:39:48  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ryanofsky opened pull request #16415: Get rid of PendingWalletTx class (master...pr/nopend) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16415
3012019-07-18T16:39:49  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3022019-07-18T16:42:20  *** owowo has quit IRC
3032019-07-18T16:42:38  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3042019-07-18T16:47:20  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3052019-07-18T16:51:26  *** Skirmant has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3062019-07-18T16:57:19  *** jonatack has quit IRC
3072019-07-18T16:58:16  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3082019-07-18T17:02:14  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
3092019-07-18T17:02:40  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3102019-07-18T17:04:47  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3112019-07-18T17:05:26  *** jungly has quit IRC
3122019-07-18T17:10:18  *** arubi has quit IRC
3132019-07-18T17:10:50  *** Krellan has quit IRC
3142019-07-18T17:17:22  *** Skirmant has quit IRC
3152019-07-18T17:25:06  *** Skirmant has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3162019-07-18T17:31:14  *** timothy has quit IRC
3172019-07-18T17:31:18  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
3182019-07-18T17:33:14  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
3192019-07-18T17:35:49  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3202019-07-18T17:38:47  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3212019-07-18T17:38:47  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] hebasto opened pull request #16416: Negated -datadir option implies default datadir (master...20190718-nodatadir) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16416
3222019-07-18T17:38:59  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3232019-07-18T17:41:58  *** Krellan has quit IRC
3242019-07-18T17:44:34  *** pierre_rochard has quit IRC
3252019-07-18T17:44:48  *** pierre_rochard has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3262019-07-18T17:45:20  *** takinbo has quit IRC
3272019-07-18T17:46:06  *** moneyball has quit IRC
3282019-07-18T17:48:29  *** takinbo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3292019-07-18T17:48:30  *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3302019-07-18T17:55:18  *** scoop has quit IRC
3312019-07-18T17:56:31  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3322019-07-18T17:59:48  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3332019-07-18T18:00:02  *** DrGuschtel has quit IRC
3342019-07-18T18:03:52  *** zalun1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3352019-07-18T18:05:39  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3362019-07-18T18:09:00  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3372019-07-18T18:19:52  *** Krellan has quit IRC
3382019-07-18T18:21:12  *** Jirk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3392019-07-18T18:26:27  *** Jirk has quit IRC
3402019-07-18T18:26:52  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3412019-07-18T18:33:50  <sdaftuar> wumpus: my topic suggestion is more to discuss the implications of there being more -blocksonly listening nodes out there
3422019-07-18T18:37:14  <wumpus> okay,makes sense
3432019-07-18T18:39:23  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3442019-07-18T18:42:57  *** harrigan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3452019-07-18T18:43:36  *** elichai2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3462019-07-18T18:44:02  <warren> sdaftuar: is their motivation bandwidth reduction?
3472019-07-18T18:45:18  *** ExEric3 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3482019-07-18T18:47:05  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3492019-07-18T18:47:32  *** DeanWeen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3502019-07-18T18:49:27  <dongcarl> wumpus: reading the addrv2 BIP now... why VARINT for time and service bits, why not just u64s?
3512019-07-18T18:49:52  <sdaftuar> warren: presumably?
3522019-07-18T18:50:52  <wumpus> dongcarl: to save space in the common case
3532019-07-18T18:50:54  <gleb> There are also attack vectors implied by transaction relay topology leaks, but I don't know for now how practical those are.
3542019-07-18T18:50:56  <wumpus> (bandwidth)
3552019-07-18T18:51:11  <sipa> who is they?
3562019-07-18T18:51:30  <gleb> -blocksonly listening nodes I think?
3572019-07-18T18:51:45  *** werrwer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3582019-07-18T18:52:01  <sipa> i mean in warren's question, "they" seems to refer to persons
3592019-07-18T18:52:05  <wumpus> dongcarl: these are structures which are potentially repeated many times in a packet, so every byte saved is good
3602019-07-18T18:52:27  <wumpus> dongcarl: why the preference for u64s?
3612019-07-18T18:53:10  *** etwert has quit IRC
3622019-07-18T18:53:15  <dongcarl> Eh, just thought it's simpler
3632019-07-18T18:53:21  <wumpus> one thing that addrv2 does, too, is represent ipv4 addresses as four bytes
3642019-07-18T18:54:02  <dongcarl> wumpus: Oh, that's good
3652019-07-18T18:54:08  <sipa> a varint for a 33-bit value is also 8 bytes
3662019-07-18T18:54:15  <sipa> *9 bytes
3672019-07-18T18:54:32  <wumpus> so if you, at the same time, blow up time to 8 bytes...
3682019-07-18T18:54:39  <sipa> assuming it is refering to the usual protocol compactsize encoding, not our internal varint encoding
3692019-07-18T18:54:56  <wumpus> sipa: yes, one suggestion was to quantize time, this would avoid some topology leak attacks as well as save space
3702019-07-18T18:55:30  <sipa> i don't see the topology argument; it's just the data inside the addresses, not their encoding that matters?
3712019-07-18T18:55:54  <wumpus> precise last-seen times allowed for that
3722019-07-18T18:56:30  <wumpus> AFAIK there was already a mitigation against that, though
3732019-07-18T18:57:23  <dongcarl> Right, there seems to be quite a few possibilities for the "time" field discussed in the BIP
3742019-07-18T18:57:30  <wumpus> "(gmaxwell) If you care about space time field could be reduced to 16 bits easily. Turn it into a "time ago seen" quantized to 1 hour precision. (IIRC we quantize times to 2hrs regardless)."
3752019-07-18T18:57:32  *** DeanWeen has quit IRC
3762019-07-18T18:57:37  <dongcarl> 1. UNIX epoch 2. last seen 3. whether to quantize
3772019-07-18T18:57:52  *** DeanWeen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3782019-07-18T18:57:53  <wumpus> oh, right
3792019-07-18T18:58:18  <wumpus> I kind of forgot that he made the "time ago" suggestion, it seems weird for gossiping
3802019-07-18T18:59:07  <dongcarl> I feel like epoch quantized to 1 hr precision sounds good...
3812019-07-18T18:59:09  <wumpus> dongcarl: in the BIP itself it simply encodes absolute time, those considerations are separate
3822019-07-18T18:59:23  <dongcarl> not sure what is meant by (we quantize time to 2hr regardless)
3832019-07-18T18:59:55  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
3842019-07-18T19:00:00  <wumpus> apparently we already do that in the net code
3852019-07-18T19:00:05  <wumpus> to mitigate the topology leak attack
3862019-07-18T19:00:08  <wumpus> but I don't know where tbh
3872019-07-18T19:00:21  <meshcollider> meeting?
3882019-07-18T19:00:22  <dongcarl> sounds like I need to do more documentin'
3892019-07-18T19:00:27  <dongcarl> hi
3902019-07-18T19:00:28  <wumpus> #startmeeting
3912019-07-18T19:00:28  <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Jul 18 19:00:28 2019 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
3922019-07-18T19:00:28  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
3932019-07-18T19:00:31  <jnewbery> hi
3942019-07-18T19:00:40  <kanzure> hi
3952019-07-18T19:00:42  <jonasschnelli> hi
3962019-07-18T19:00:43  <kallewoof> hello
3972019-07-18T19:00:52  <hebasto> hi
3982019-07-18T19:00:57  <wumpus> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag provoostenator aj Chris_Stewart_5 dongcarl gwillen jamesob ken281221 ryanofsky gleb moneyball kvaciral
3992019-07-18T19:01:05  <achow101> hi
4002019-07-18T19:01:07  <sipa> hi
4012019-07-18T19:01:07  <meshcollider> hi
4022019-07-18T19:01:10  * dongcarl would like to talk about addrv2 some more after the meeting if people have time
4032019-07-18T19:01:29  <luke-jr> hi
4042019-07-18T19:01:30  *** instagibbs_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4052019-07-18T19:01:31  <jamesob> hi
4062019-07-18T19:02:19  <moneyball> hi
4072019-07-18T19:02:32  <wumpus> three topics proposed in https://gist.github.com/moneyball/071d608fdae217c2a6d7c35955881d8a this time:  Remove mempool expiry, treat txs as replaceable instead , 0.18.1 and "-blocksonly not being a hidden option in 0.18.1"
4082019-07-18T19:02:35  <moneyball> https://gist.github.com/moneyball/071d608fdae217c2a6d7c35955881d8a
4092019-07-18T19:02:49  <cfields> hi
4102019-07-18T19:04:06  <wumpus> #topic High priority for review
4112019-07-18T19:04:24  <warren> hi
4122019-07-18T19:04:31  <wumpus> current: 4 blockers, 5 things chasing concept ACK
4132019-07-18T19:04:36  <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8
4142019-07-18T19:04:36  <gleb> hi
4152019-07-18T19:04:54  <jamesob> was hoping to get #16355 added
4162019-07-18T19:04:56  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16355 | refactor: move CCoinsViewErrorCatcher out of init.cpp by jamesob · Pull Request #16355 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4172019-07-18T19:04:56  <wumpus> anything to add, anything ready for merge?
4182019-07-18T19:05:16  <jonasschnelli> May I add #16202 to the list?
4192019-07-18T19:05:18  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16202 | Refactor network message deserialization by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #16202 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4202019-07-18T19:05:28  <kallewoof> wumpus: I would like #16411 in Chasing Concept ACK, if possible
4212019-07-18T19:05:31  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16411 | Signet support by kallewoof · Pull Request #16411 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4222019-07-18T19:05:52  <wumpus> jamesob jonasschnelli kallewoof sure
4232019-07-18T19:06:01  <jamesob> thanks!
4242019-07-18T19:07:39  <wumpus> ok added
4252019-07-18T19:07:55  <wumpus> there are *many* things chasing concept ACK, are there any making progress (maybe enough to remove them?)
4262019-07-18T19:09:56  <luke-jr> I almost wonder if concept-acks should be done separately from PRs, with more user input
4272019-07-18T19:09:56  <wumpus> #topic Remove mempool expiry, treat txs as replaceable instead (MarcoFalke)
4282019-07-18T19:10:27  <MarcoFalke> Pull request is here #16409
4292019-07-18T19:10:29  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16409 | Remove mempool expiry, treat txs as replaceable instead by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #16409 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4302019-07-18T19:10:35  <MarcoFalke> And already received some feedback
4312019-07-18T19:10:42  <luke-jr> Sounds like it should be two PRs…
4322019-07-18T19:10:55  <wumpus> luke-jr: not sure separating them out is a key to get more interest imo
4332019-07-18T19:11:15  <luke-jr> expiry helps remove unconfirming txs from RAM etc
4342019-07-18T19:11:19  <MarcoFalke> luke-jr: Yeah, if removing expiry is so controversial, then yes
4352019-07-18T19:11:37  <wumpus> anything that touches policy is probably somewhat controversial
4362019-07-18T19:11:52  <sipa> another approach is to make the marginal-cost-for-replacement go to 0 after some time
4372019-07-18T19:11:57  <sdaftuar> I think expiry performs an important job, albeit not perfectly, which is handling diverse node policies in a semi-reasonable way
4382019-07-18T19:12:08  <luke-jr> but what if the sender doesn't replace?
4392019-07-18T19:12:11  <MarcoFalke> luke-jr: YOu can not expect to use that ram anyway, since you set the max usage to well the max usage
4402019-07-18T19:12:11  <sipa> yeah, i'd need to think more about the impact there
4412019-07-18T19:12:38  <luke-jr> MarcoFalke: it might not always be maxxed out
4422019-07-18T19:12:47  <jnewbery> sipa: that doesn't solve the case of txs being pinned
4432019-07-18T19:12:56  <sipa> jnewbery: ah yes
4442019-07-18T19:14:01  <MarcoFalke> sipa: I don't see this as an issue in the network as of today (it is mostly theoretical)
4452019-07-18T19:14:23  <luke-jr> MarcoFalke: it's an issue because people are designing around it
4462019-07-18T19:14:28  <sdaftuar> the issue of diverse node policies is an issue
4472019-07-18T19:14:32  <midnightmagic> I was going to say, expiry is super useful..
4482019-07-18T19:14:43  <sdaftuar> if we deploy this now, then in the future when we make a policy change, we'll have a problem to think about
4492019-07-18T19:14:51  <sdaftuar> which we won't have a good way to solve
4502019-07-18T19:15:42  <MarcoFalke> sdaftuar: Agree that it might be premature to remove expiry right now, but in the long term it could at least be limited to high-fee txs
4512019-07-18T19:15:48  <wumpus> what is the primary motivation to remove expiry?
4522019-07-18T19:16:16  <sipa> sdaftuar: when a policy change happens, there is always a shutdown+restart involved, no?
4532019-07-18T19:16:25  <sipa> sdaftuar: so there is a load from mempool.dat in between?
4542019-07-18T19:16:29  <sdaftuar> the issue is around what happens to old nodes
4552019-07-18T19:16:34  <MarcoFalke> If miners are running the default settings, they might throw away income. If they are not, then nodes have a false sense of what can be replaced
4562019-07-18T19:16:41  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4572019-07-18T19:16:46  <sdaftuar> which will not have the new rule, but will also not exprie things that are not getting mined
4582019-07-18T19:16:52  <luke-jr> not just old nodes. even updated nodes don't have a common policy
4592019-07-18T19:17:00  <sdaftuar> luke-jr: i agree with that too
4602019-07-18T19:17:15  <MarcoFalke> So the rbf pinning issue jnewbery mentions is not solved if miners are keeping the tx and you can replace it in your own mempool
4612019-07-18T19:17:32  <wumpus> so dropping expiry would mean that some transactions could get stuck in the mempool literally forever
4622019-07-18T19:17:38  <sdaftuar> wumpus: exactly
4632019-07-18T19:17:57  <sipa> i feel 2 weeks is sufficiently long that it isn't actually affecting anything that will likely confirm
4642019-07-18T19:18:01  <sipa> do we have numbers otherwise?
4652019-07-18T19:18:11  <wumpus> even an expiry of, say, 2 month would be better than none at all in that regard
4662019-07-18T19:18:16  <sipa> like at what rate do transactions get expired from common mempools?
4672019-07-18T19:18:23  <sipa> and do any of them still confirm after?
4682019-07-18T19:18:57  <sipa> or maybe even better, how often do transaction expire from the mempool, and then re-enter it?
4692019-07-18T19:18:58  <wumpus> would be useful to have that information
4702019-07-18T19:19:10  <kallewoof> sipa: I can get those numbers
4712019-07-18T19:19:22  <sipa> that'd be great to have in this discussion
4722019-07-18T19:19:25  <luke-jr> What problem is this trying to solve?
4732019-07-18T19:19:27  <kallewoof> sipa: They're not very large, from what I have seen
4742019-07-18T19:20:06  <MarcoFalke> kallewoof: The number of expiries or the number that are mined after expiry?
4752019-07-18T19:20:11  <sdaftuar> i think this needs to be thought about from the perspective of older software as well
4762019-07-18T19:20:15  *** owowo has quit IRC
4772019-07-18T19:20:30  <sdaftuar> if you only analyze this from the perspective of the latest version of Bitcoin Core, for instance, you only get a one-sided view
4782019-07-18T19:20:31  <kallewoof> MarcoFalke: I can fine tune it with some tweakery. Will not be done today, but can do tomorrow
4792019-07-18T19:20:34  <sipa> but it doesn't have to be large; say if 5 transactions expire per day, but 4.5 of those then re-enter the mempool again, that's evidence that due to rebroadcasting the expiration is effectively ineffective
4802019-07-18T19:20:43  * sipa likes "effectively ineffective"
4812019-07-18T19:21:02  <wumpus> hehe
4822019-07-18T19:21:23  <kallewoof> MarcoFalke: To clarify, I can fine tune it to count txs that do get mined after being purged from mempool at least once.
4832019-07-18T19:22:12  <sdaftuar> can you also do that from the perspective of an 0.15 node?
4842019-07-18T19:22:25  <kallewoof> sdaftuar: no
4852019-07-18T19:22:42  <Raystonn> It ineffectively affects the mempool, which results in not much net effect.
4862019-07-18T19:22:44  <kallewoof> sdaftuar: well, actually yes, but not without your help.
4872019-07-18T19:23:01  <sdaftuar> kallewoof: my data is probably insufficient too, unfortunately
4882019-07-18T19:23:24  <sdaftuar> i am not really sure i guess
4892019-07-18T19:23:26  <kallewoof> sdaftuar: i thought it recorded everything
4902019-07-18T19:24:01  <kallewoof> sdaftuar: besides, having the simulation mode alone means all you have to do is fake the time and throw the txs at the right moment and the node should do the expiration on its own
4912019-07-18T19:24:58  <sdaftuar> i don't know offhand how representative its outbound peers are
4922019-07-18T19:25:25  <sdaftuar> as an example, i was surprised today to discover that my 0.12 node accepted and then expired some transactions on a particular day in May
4932019-07-18T19:25:32  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4942019-07-18T19:25:48  <sdaftuar> it looks like on May 5, it received some very low-fee transactions, which were accepted to the mempool as "priority" transactions
4952019-07-18T19:26:01  <sdaftuar> i was somewhat shocked that its peers (it only has the 8 outbound) would relay such things to it
4962019-07-18T19:26:09  <sdaftuar> but i guess it has some peer diversity
4972019-07-18T19:27:01  <MarcoFalke> sdaftuar: Those are probably valid txs, so I wouldn't call that "shocking"
4982019-07-18T19:27:40  <sdaftuar> MarcoFalke: i was shocked that the policy diversity on the network was so strong that 8 random peers would include some that aren't enforcing the minrelayfee we have had in place since 0.15
4992019-07-18T19:27:45  <luke-jr> mempool still had a priority exception in 0.15? O.o
5002019-07-18T19:27:55  <MarcoFalke> Ok, fine.
5012019-07-18T19:27:57  <sdaftuar> i think 0.15 was when we first got rid of it
5022019-07-18T19:28:02  <kallewoof> I looked at our email convo and it looks like I am waiting for you to give me a snapshot. :)
5032019-07-18T19:28:16  <sdaftuar> kallewoof: oops, thanks for the reminder :)
5042019-07-18T19:28:18  <MarcoFalke> I think this is too controversial right now, so I will let it sit for a while
5052019-07-18T19:28:25  <MarcoFalke> and revisit later
5062019-07-18T19:28:31  <MarcoFalke> Can we chat about 0.18.1?
5072019-07-18T19:28:43  <jnewbery> MarcoFalke: after some digging, it turns out those transactions were actually from 2017. Someone had dug them up and rebroadcast them
5082019-07-18T19:29:00  <MarcoFalke> sdaftuar and me had a topic on 0.18.1
5092019-07-18T19:29:20  <wumpus> #topic 0.18.1
5102019-07-18T19:29:22  <MarcoFalke> jnewbery: Which reads to me like a reason to remove expiry, but anyway
5112019-07-18T19:29:23  <Raystonn> A hodler found and opened his wallet again.
5122019-07-18T19:29:32  *** queip has quit IRC
5132019-07-18T19:30:04  <sdaftuar> i wanted to discuss the impact of the -blocksonly change
5142019-07-18T19:30:08  <MarcoFalke> (Think how shocking it would be if you see a tx confirm 2 years after you "cancelled" it)
5152019-07-18T19:30:15  <wumpus> apparently, the maxtxfee fix is harder to backport than expected
5162019-07-18T19:30:40  <MarcoFalke> wumpus: I will take a look as well, but if it is really too hard I am fine with 0.18.2
5172019-07-18T19:30:55  <Raystonn> The only way to guarantee a transaction will not confirm once it has broadcast is to spend the relevant UTXOs in another.
5182019-07-18T19:30:59  <wumpus> oh, looks like promag  did already open a backport PR: #16414
5192019-07-18T19:31:01  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16414 | 0.18: wallet: Fix -maxtxfee check by moving it to CWallet::CreateTransaction by promag · Pull Request #16414 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5202019-07-18T19:31:05  <wumpus> hadn't seen this
5212019-07-18T19:31:06  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5222019-07-18T19:31:14  <MarcoFalke> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/41
5232019-07-18T19:31:17  <wumpus> in any case as this is a non-clean backport it does need review and testing
5242019-07-18T19:31:34  <wumpus> more than had it been a clean backport, at least…
5252019-07-18T19:31:39  <MarcoFalke> Three people wrote tests for it
5262019-07-18T19:32:05  <MarcoFalke> So #16412 will get in as well?
5272019-07-18T19:32:07  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16412 | net: Make poll in InterruptibleRecv only filter for POLLIN events. by tecnovert · Pull Request #16412 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5282019-07-18T19:32:31  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: it should, it's a small and obvious change, that fixes a real problem, and is easy to backport
5292019-07-18T19:32:47  <MarcoFalke> #15911 doesn't make progess, so it'll have to wait
5302019-07-18T19:32:51  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15911 | Use wallet RBF default for walletcreatefundedpsbt by Sjors · Pull Request #15911 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5312019-07-18T19:33:06  <wumpus> yes
5322019-07-18T19:33:25  <wumpus> it's not ready for master yet, let alone backporting, so let's move it to 0.18.2
5332019-07-18T19:34:29  <wumpus> done
5342019-07-18T19:35:08  <wumpus> what about #15706?
5352019-07-18T19:35:10  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15706 | build: Check QT library version by lucayepa · Pull Request #15706 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5362019-07-18T19:35:28  <fanquake> I think that wait
5372019-07-18T19:35:32  <wumpus> it's been waiting for author for a while
5382019-07-18T19:35:33  <MarcoFalke> agree
5392019-07-18T19:35:37  <wumpus> even though my comment is trivial
5402019-07-18T19:35:46  <fanquake> *can
5412019-07-18T19:35:53  <wumpus> ok, moving
5422019-07-18T19:36:05  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5432019-07-18T19:36:20  <wumpus> ok let's go to sdaftuar's topic
5442019-07-18T19:36:35  <promag> hi
5452019-07-18T19:36:44  <wumpus> -blocksonly is now a non-hidden option in 0.18.1
5462019-07-18T19:36:49  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
5472019-07-18T19:36:56  <sdaftuar> so historically, i believe we have not made the -blocksonly option more widely known because we don't have good protections in place for a network where many listening nodes are not relaying transactions, i think
5482019-07-18T19:37:15  <sdaftuar> now that we're doing it, i think we should make sure there are not unintended side effects
5492019-07-18T19:37:24  <MarcoFalke> sdaftuar: It is mentioned on bitcoin.org
5502019-07-18T19:37:36  <MarcoFalke> And has been for years
5512019-07-18T19:37:46  <sdaftuar> for instance, if we see a rise in -blocksonly listening nodes, then right now we have no protections in place for ensuring connectivity to transaction-relaying peers
5522019-07-18T19:37:54  <jonasschnelli> fee-estimations are not possible with -blocksonly? right?
5532019-07-18T19:38:10  <sdaftuar> MarcoFalke: i was not aware!  anyway, perhaps that doesn't matter much, i think we should still be concerned about making our software more robust
5542019-07-18T19:38:21  <MarcoFalke> agree
5552019-07-18T19:38:22  <jnewbery> jonasschnelli: correct, but I don't see how that's relevant
5562019-07-18T19:38:24  <kallewoof> jonasschnelli: fee estimations use blocks only, so it should be possible
5572019-07-18T19:38:27  <wumpus> I don't personally think unhiding the option in help is going to make that much of a difference, it's been well-known
5582019-07-18T19:38:33  <warren> maybe an informational tx relaying service bit?
5592019-07-18T19:38:48  <jnewbery> kallewoof: fee estimation requires a mempool
5602019-07-18T19:38:50  <sdaftuar> wumpus: fair point, perhaps our choice here is not relevant
5612019-07-18T19:38:54  <luke-jr> do they dset NODE_NETWORK?
5622019-07-18T19:38:59  <warren> or informational not-tx-relaying service bit?
5632019-07-18T19:39:03  <sdaftuar> luke-jr: yes
5642019-07-18T19:39:18  <kallewoof> jnewbery: weird. i thought it only used blocks. maybe it changed since last i looked at it.
5652019-07-18T19:39:41  <sdaftuar> i think we could make our p2p code smarter to ensure we have "enough" tx-relaying outbounds, but this work needs to be done, and i think we should prioritize it
5662019-07-18T19:39:57  <luke-jr> warren: I don't think we gain anything by making it a negative bit
5672019-07-18T19:40:35  <MarcoFalke> sdaftuar: Could you create a brainstorming issue for that?
5682019-07-18T19:40:59  <sdaftuar> also, old software has no protections, i don't know what to do about that. presumably we're still a while away from there being a large fraction of listening nodes being blocksonly, so we have some time
5692019-07-18T19:41:09  <sdaftuar> MarcoFalke: sure
5702019-07-18T19:41:20  <wumpus> is blocksonly really that popular?
5712019-07-18T19:41:26  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery: I think its relevant because it reduces the usability of blocksonly&wallet significant. I's already an expert features and thouse who are know the blocksonly feature.
5722019-07-18T19:41:28  <sdaftuar> wumpus: i forgot to mention why i brought this up
5732019-07-18T19:41:42  <gleb> I'll try to simulate how "half of nodes turning blocksonly" or something like that might affect tx relay latency or compact blocks relay latency, let me know if you have other metrics in mind
5742019-07-18T19:41:43  <sdaftuar> i encountered a random blocksonly listening node when testing something recently, and i was surprised
5752019-07-18T19:42:11  <wumpus> sdaftuar: that's very anocdotal but yeah :)
5762019-07-18T19:42:13  <MarcoFalke> Could a short-term fix be to disconnect a random outbound if all outbounds are blocksonly?
5772019-07-18T19:42:15  <sdaftuar> wumpus: so i don't know how common it is now, but when i realized we were unhiding the option and recommending it in our docs, i figured its popularity could rise
5782019-07-18T19:42:25  <jnewbery> kallewoof: https://bitcointechtalk.com/an-introduction-to-bitcoin-core-fee-estimation-27920880ad0 :)
5792019-07-18T19:42:34  <warren> I had been running a blocksonly node for years
5802019-07-18T19:42:34  <wumpus> if you find one by accident then it's probably more common
5812019-07-18T19:43:02  <jonasschnelli> MarcoFalke: wouldn't that require a new service flag (or a split of NODE_NETWORK / RELAY)?
5822019-07-18T19:43:08  <jonasschnelli> (to work reliable)
5832019-07-18T19:43:30  <warren> not "reliable" but at least you could be told all your peers aren't relaying
5842019-07-18T19:43:32  <sdaftuar> jonasschnelli: right now, nodes running with -blocksonly achieve that by setting the fRelayTxes=false in the VERSION message
5852019-07-18T19:43:35  <sdaftuar> so we can detect it on connection
5862019-07-18T19:44:08  <wumpus> right, you can detect it for connected nodes through the version message
5872019-07-18T19:44:36  <jonasschnelli> I see. So we could just disconnect fRelayTxes=false up to a certain threshold
5882019-07-18T19:45:21  <wumpus> for outbound only I hope
5892019-07-18T19:45:53  <sdaftuar> i wonder if the dnsseeds people run are tuned to look for this?
5902019-07-18T19:45:58  * sdaftuar stares at all of you
5912019-07-18T19:46:10  * jonasschnelli checking....
5922019-07-18T19:46:17  <sipa> i doubt it
5932019-07-18T19:46:36  *** harrigan has quit IRC
5942019-07-18T19:46:54  <jonasschnelli> it's not checking the fRelayTxes
5952019-07-18T19:47:27  <sdaftuar> matt seems skeptical this is a good idea, anyway i just wanted bring up the topic so others can think about it
5962019-07-18T19:47:35  <wumpus> I'm not sure it should filter out all nodes that are blocksonly
5972019-07-18T19:47:51  <cfields> sdaftuar: why would it? Seeds are primarily hit during IBD.
5982019-07-18T19:48:23  <sdaftuar> cfields: i think in practice we hit the seeds a lot now, actually, but i think that's also a bug
5992019-07-18T19:48:33  <wumpus> the main task of the P2P network is relaying blocks, after all, sure there need to be nodes that relay transactions, but I think it's a bad idea to just ignore nodes that don't
6002019-07-18T19:48:45  <wumpus> cfields: right
6012019-07-18T19:49:00  <sdaftuar> wumpus: yeah i think we can tolerate some level of blocksonly peers, but not all of our outbounds
6022019-07-18T19:49:01  <wumpus> for IBD it definitely doesn't matter
6032019-07-18T19:49:04  <sdaftuar> i'm not sure where to draw the line
6042019-07-18T19:49:06  <wumpus> sdaftuar: agreed
6052019-07-18T19:49:27  <wumpus> (it ignores transactions during IBD, after all)
6062019-07-18T19:50:05  <cfields> sdaftuar: agree that it's something that should be handled, though.
6072019-07-18T19:50:12  <MarcoFalke> Heh, so it would be helpful to connect to blocksonly in IBD
6082019-07-18T19:50:12  <cfields> s/handled/tolerated/
6092019-07-18T19:50:58  <kallewoof> 50/50 for tx relaying nodes, anything-goes for blocksonly nodes?
6102019-07-18T19:51:18  <luke-jr> MarcoFalke: well, except some people use blocksonly as a kind of "super low bandwidth mode" :P
6112019-07-18T19:51:38  <wumpus> well if you enable pruning too...
6122019-07-18T19:51:45  <warren> perhaps many using blocksonly would be happy with erlay
6132019-07-18T19:51:57  <MarcoFalke> I hope they don't accept incoming then
6142019-07-18T19:52:32  <warren> hope isn't a defense
6152019-07-18T19:52:49  <MarcoFalke> At least o
6162019-07-18T19:53:31  <MarcoFalke> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/reduce-traffic.md
6172019-07-18T19:53:47  <MarcoFalke> Listen is mentioned as second step, blocksonly as 4th
6182019-07-18T19:54:20  * MarcoFalke getting tea ...
6192019-07-18T19:54:34  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6202019-07-18T19:54:47  <warren> I dunno about other people but I had blocksonly=1 on one node listening even before it was in a stable release.
6212019-07-18T19:55:11  <gleb> warren: You should tell sdaftuar your ip, perhaps you were the node he connected to :)
6222019-07-18T19:55:30  <warren> I'd be surprised if I was the only
6232019-07-18T19:56:13  * sdaftuar is done with this topic if we want to move on
6242019-07-18T19:56:52  <MarcoFalke> #action create brainstorming issue to not forget about it
6252019-07-18T19:56:52  <tryphe> looking for a relabel, and some brainstorming around file handle counts, if possible: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16003 :)
6262019-07-18T19:57:36  <fanquake> Don’t think there are any more proposed topics.
6272019-07-18T19:57:45  <fanquake> End meeting?
6282019-07-18T19:58:00  <MarcoFalke> tryphe: What label do you want?
6292019-07-18T19:58:02  <wumpus> #endmeeting
6302019-07-18T19:58:02  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Jul 18 19:58:02 2019 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
6312019-07-18T19:58:02  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-07-18-19.00.html
6322019-07-18T19:58:02  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-07-18-19.00.txt
6332019-07-18T19:58:02  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-07-18-19.00.log.html
6342019-07-18T19:59:01  <sdaftuar> btw if anyone is interested, i think i've made a lot of progress on refactoring our code to support package relay.  Review welcome! #16400 / #16401
6352019-07-18T19:59:03  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16400 | [refactor] Rewrite AcceptToMemoryPoolWorker() using smaller parts by sdaftuar · Pull Request #16400 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6362019-07-18T19:59:05  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16401 | Package relay by sdaftuar · Pull Request #16401 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6372019-07-18T19:59:11  *** emilengler has quit IRC
6382019-07-18T19:59:33  <tryphe> MarcoFalke, hmm, not sure. probably bug/refactoring/resource usage/brainstorming
6392019-07-18T20:00:25  <kallewoof> luke-jr: if you need anything from me on https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/803 let me know. I believe I answered your statement in https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/803#discussion_r304880606
6402019-07-18T20:01:03  <aj> MarcoFalke: ping re: #16328 btw?
6412019-07-18T20:01:06  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16328 | rpc: Tidy up reporting of buried and ongoing softforks by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #16328 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6422019-07-18T20:01:09  <tryphe> MarcoFalke, ty :)
6432019-07-18T20:01:46  <MarcoFalke> aj: I lost interest in that at least temporarily
6442019-07-18T20:02:12  <achow101> is there a wallet meeting tomorrow?
6452019-07-18T20:02:57  *** luc__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6462019-07-18T20:06:58  <aj> MarcoFalke: aww. i hope it rekindles soon then :)
6472019-07-18T20:07:30  *** luc__ has quit IRC
6482019-07-18T20:09:13  *** instagibbs_ has quit IRC
6492019-07-18T20:09:58  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
6502019-07-18T20:19:08  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6512019-07-18T20:28:50  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
6522019-07-18T20:32:41  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6532019-07-18T20:32:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #16420: QA: Fix race condition in wallet_encryption test (master...2019/07/wallet_enc_test_fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16420
6542019-07-18T20:32:46  *** scoop has quit IRC
6552019-07-18T20:32:48  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
6562019-07-18T20:33:48  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6572019-07-18T20:33:56  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6582019-07-18T20:33:56  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #16415: Get rid of PendingWalletTx class (master...pr/nopend) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16415
6592019-07-18T20:34:00  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
6602019-07-18T20:34:16  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6612019-07-18T20:34:16  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke reopened pull request #16415: Get rid of PendingWalletTx class (master...pr/nopend) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16415
6622019-07-18T20:34:17  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
6632019-07-18T20:37:58  *** scoop has quit IRC
6642019-07-18T20:39:49  *** harrigan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6652019-07-18T20:40:22  *** harrigan has quit IRC
6662019-07-18T20:43:36  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
6672019-07-18T20:50:47  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6682019-07-18T20:57:06  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6692019-07-18T21:00:01  *** zalun1 has quit IRC
6702019-07-18T21:03:47  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6712019-07-18T21:04:50  *** nirik-fre has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6722019-07-18T21:08:33  *** scoop has quit IRC
6732019-07-18T21:19:17  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6742019-07-18T21:19:17  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] TheBlueMatt opened pull request #16421: Conservatively accept RBF bumps bumping one tx at the package limits (master...2019-07-lightning-policy-bump) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16421
6752019-07-18T21:19:23  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
6762019-07-18T21:20:17  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6772019-07-18T21:20:17  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] TheBlueMatt closed pull request #16323:  Call ProcessNewBlock() asynchronously (master...2019-07-background-pnb) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16323
6782019-07-18T21:20:20  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
6792019-07-18T21:20:37  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6802019-07-18T21:20:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] TheBlueMatt closed pull request #16324: Get cs_main out of the critical path in ProcessMessages (master...2019-07-peerstate-initial-moves) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16324
6812019-07-18T21:20:40  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
6822019-07-18T21:26:08  *** hebasto has quit IRC
6832019-07-18T21:29:12  *** queip has quit IRC
6842019-07-18T21:35:08  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6852019-07-18T21:46:30  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6862019-07-18T21:52:49  *** scoop has quit IRC
6872019-07-18T21:57:54  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
6882019-07-18T22:09:31  *** Krellan has quit IRC
6892019-07-18T22:10:13  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6902019-07-18T22:16:18  *** Zenton has quit IRC
6912019-07-18T22:19:12  *** Krellan has quit IRC
6922019-07-18T22:25:28  *** queip has quit IRC
6932019-07-18T22:32:11  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6942019-07-18T22:32:50  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6952019-07-18T22:37:07  *** scoop has quit IRC
6962019-07-18T22:38:06  *** kristapsk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6972019-07-18T22:39:48  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6982019-07-18T22:41:39  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6992019-07-18T22:42:15  *** jb55 has quit IRC
7002019-07-18T22:43:06  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
7012019-07-18T22:45:43  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
7022019-07-18T22:48:53  *** Krellan has quit IRC
7032019-07-18T22:48:59  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
7042019-07-18T22:54:03  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7052019-07-18T23:01:10  *** gribble has quit IRC
7062019-07-18T23:01:41  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7072019-07-18T23:04:26  *** spinza has quit IRC
7082019-07-18T23:06:36  *** DeanWeen has quit IRC
7092019-07-18T23:10:13  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7102019-07-18T23:10:47  *** gribble has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7112019-07-18T23:13:16  *** kljasdfvv has quit IRC
7122019-07-18T23:13:41  *** kljasdfvv has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7132019-07-18T23:20:41  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7142019-07-18T23:31:54  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
7152019-07-18T23:32:18  *** darosior has quit IRC
7162019-07-18T23:39:18  *** darosior has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7172019-07-18T23:44:56  *** gribble has quit IRC
7182019-07-18T23:56:44  *** Krellan has quit IRC