1 2019-07-25T00:00:01  *** hcchien has quit IRC
  2 2019-07-25T00:03:00  *** ozbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  3 2019-07-25T00:27:50  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  4 2019-07-25T00:28:56  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  5 2019-07-25T00:33:23  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
  6 2019-07-25T00:38:51  <fanquake> cfields: Would you be able to put the 10.14 macOS SDK up onto bitcoincore.org, or wherever Travis pulls the current SDK from?
  7 2019-07-25T00:39:05  <fanquake> It's blocking Travis in #16392.
  8 2019-07-25T00:39:07  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16392 | WIP build: macOS toolchain update by fanquake · Pull Request #16392 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
  9 2019-07-25T00:43:31  *** Eagle[TM] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 10 2019-07-25T00:44:50  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
 11 2019-07-25T00:45:31  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 12 2019-07-25T00:48:40  *** Eagle[TM] has quit IRC
 13 2019-07-25T00:50:20  *** captjakk has quit IRC
 14 2019-07-25T00:50:36  *** captjakk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 15 2019-07-25T00:51:14  *** toto99 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 16 2019-07-25T00:51:55  *** captjakk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 17 2019-07-25T01:05:56  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 18 2019-07-25T01:05:57  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d960d5ca99b7...d5a54ce8f0cf
 19 2019-07-25T01:05:58  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4433ed0 Suhas Daftuar: [validation] Crash if disconnecting a block fails
 20 2019-07-25T01:05:59  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a47df13 Suhas Daftuar: [qa] Test disconnect block failure -> shutdown
 21 2019-07-25T01:05:59  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d5a54ce fanquake: Merge #15305: [validation] Crash if disconnecting a block fails
 22 2019-07-25T01:06:01  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 23 2019-07-25T01:06:31  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 24 2019-07-25T01:06:31  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #15305: [validation] Crash if disconnecting a block fails (master...2019-01-disconnect-failure-shutdown) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15305
 25 2019-07-25T01:06:33  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 26 2019-07-25T01:07:06  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 27 2019-07-25T01:11:42  *** jeremyrubin has quit IRC
 28 2019-07-25T01:12:06  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 29 2019-07-25T01:20:42  *** toto99 has quit IRC
 30 2019-07-25T01:23:27  *** Eagle[TM] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 31 2019-07-25T01:27:03  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
 32 2019-07-25T01:40:30  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 33 2019-07-25T01:42:26  *** Eagle[TM] has quit IRC
 34 2019-07-25T01:44:36  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 35 2019-07-25T01:44:36  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d5a54ce8f0cf...fe001925f803
 36 2019-07-25T01:44:36  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 77773ed MarcoFalke: doc: Remove downgrading warning in release notes, per 0.18 branch
 37 2019-07-25T01:44:37  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fe00192 fanquake: Merge #16455: doc: Remove downgrading warning in release notes, per 0.18 b...
 38 2019-07-25T01:44:38  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 39 2019-07-25T01:45:22  *** DeanWeen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 40 2019-07-25T01:45:41  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 41 2019-07-25T01:45:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #16455: doc: Remove downgrading warning in release notes, per 0.18 branch (master...1907-docReleaseNotes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16455
 42 2019-07-25T01:45:44  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 43 2019-07-25T01:46:55  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 44 2019-07-25T01:51:35  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 45 2019-07-25T01:52:50  *** Eagle[TM] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 46 2019-07-25T01:54:06  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 47 2019-07-25T01:54:15  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
 48 2019-07-25T02:04:09  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 49 2019-07-25T02:08:02  *** Eagle[TM] has quit IRC
 50 2019-07-25T02:08:22  *** Eagle[TM] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 51 2019-07-25T02:10:42  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
 52 2019-07-25T02:17:58  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 53 2019-07-25T02:20:39  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 54 2019-07-25T02:25:37  *** elichai2 has quit IRC
 55 2019-07-25T02:32:34  *** cdecker has quit IRC
 56 2019-07-25T02:45:04  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
 57 2019-07-25T02:47:49  *** promag has quit IRC
 58 2019-07-25T02:48:33  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 59 2019-07-25T02:49:39  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 60 2019-07-25T03:00:02  *** ozbot has quit IRC
 61 2019-07-25T03:04:25  *** secdragon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 62 2019-07-25T03:07:53  *** schnerchi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 63 2019-07-25T03:10:58  *** schnerch_ has quit IRC
 64 2019-07-25T03:19:22  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 65 2019-07-25T03:21:17  *** Eagle[TM] has quit IRC
 66 2019-07-25T03:21:33  *** DeanWeen has quit IRC
 67 2019-07-25T03:28:36  *** xuing has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 68 2019-07-25T03:52:31  *** hebasto_ has quit IRC
 69 2019-07-25T03:53:47  *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 70 2019-07-25T04:09:07  *** kcalvinalvin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 71 2019-07-25T04:14:10  *** kcalvinalvin has quit IRC
 72 2019-07-25T04:31:48  *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 73 2019-07-25T04:34:42  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 74 2019-07-25T04:37:10  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
 75 2019-07-25T04:41:18  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 76 2019-07-25T05:14:04  *** kcalvinalvin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 77 2019-07-25T06:00:01  *** secdragon has quit IRC
 78 2019-07-25T06:02:42  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 79 2019-07-25T06:14:20  *** Bullitje has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 80 2019-07-25T06:15:26  *** inquis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 81 2019-07-25T06:17:03  *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 82 2019-07-25T06:17:03  *** cryptapus_ has quit IRC
 83 2019-07-25T06:17:03  *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 84 2019-07-25T06:17:40  *** Bullit has quit IRC
 85 2019-07-25T06:18:00  *** cryptapus has quit IRC
 86 2019-07-25T06:37:07  *** ryanofsky has quit IRC
 87 2019-07-25T06:50:49  *** d_t has quit IRC
 88 2019-07-25T07:01:35  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 89 2019-07-25T07:03:46  *** liberiga has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 90 2019-07-25T07:05:56  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 91 2019-07-25T07:08:49  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
 92 2019-07-25T07:26:28  *** calkob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 93 2019-07-25T07:27:04  *** Deadhand has quit IRC
 94 2019-07-25T07:28:23  *** d_t has quit IRC
 95 2019-07-25T07:29:24  *** calkob has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 96 2019-07-25T07:33:10  *** Deadhand has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 97 2019-07-25T07:42:50  *** kljasdfvv has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 98 2019-07-25T07:52:43  *** xuing has quit IRC
 99 2019-07-25T07:55:56  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
100 2019-07-25T08:10:06  *** jungly has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
101 2019-07-25T08:15:23  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
102 2019-07-25T08:15:45  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
103 2019-07-25T08:18:47  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
104 2019-07-25T08:19:09  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
105 2019-07-25T08:19:48  *** dendisuhubdy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
106 2019-07-25T08:20:43  *** dgfhdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
107 2019-07-25T08:21:23  *** kcalvinalvin has quit IRC
108 2019-07-25T08:22:11  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
109 2019-07-25T08:22:33  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
110 2019-07-25T08:27:35  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
111 2019-07-25T08:27:59  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
112 2019-07-25T08:30:57  *** Victor_sueca is now known as Victorsueca
113 2019-07-25T08:34:04  *** setpill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
114 2019-07-25T08:36:52  *** dendisuhubdy has quit IRC
115 2019-07-25T08:49:56  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
116 2019-07-25T08:50:08  *** laptop500 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
117 2019-07-25T08:50:19  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
118 2019-07-25T08:56:48  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
119 2019-07-25T08:57:15  *** tnaka_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
120 2019-07-25T09:00:02  *** inquis has quit IRC
121 2019-07-25T09:02:40  *** queip has quit IRC
122 2019-07-25T09:06:52  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
123 2019-07-25T09:09:53  *** akionak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
124 2019-07-25T09:14:39  *** ihower has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
125 2019-07-25T09:28:37  *** kcalvinalvin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
126 2019-07-25T09:34:00  *** spinza has quit IRC
127 2019-07-25T09:39:08  *** Kevin30 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
128 2019-07-25T09:39:24  *** ihower has quit IRC
129 2019-07-25T09:41:01  *** lugosi1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
130 2019-07-25T09:41:02  *** kcalvina_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
131 2019-07-25T09:44:05  *** kcalvinalvin has quit IRC
132 2019-07-25T09:44:59  *** ryanofsky has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
133 2019-07-25T09:53:18  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
134 2019-07-25T10:08:11  *** kcalvina_ has quit IRC
135 2019-07-25T10:27:33  *** ptiyoyip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
136 2019-07-25T10:27:39  *** Kevin30 has quit IRC
137 2019-07-25T10:28:24  *** queip has quit IRC
138 2019-07-25T10:29:53  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
139 2019-07-25T10:31:22  *** dgfhdfg has quit IRC
140 2019-07-25T10:38:29  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
141 2019-07-25T10:47:09  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
142 2019-07-25T10:52:02  *** rh0nj has quit IRC
143 2019-07-25T10:53:07  *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
144 2019-07-25T10:53:30  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
145 2019-07-25T11:35:03  *** schnerchi has quit IRC
146 2019-07-25T11:37:35  *** schnerchi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
147 2019-07-25T11:40:55  <jonasschnelli> MarcoFalke: feature_block.py failed now for the second time in 24h in master (in my CI): https://bitcoinbuilds.org/index.php?ansilog=2ff386f7-798c-4f9a-8233-dc62978cb175.log#l7076
148 2019-07-25T11:40:57  <jonasschnelli> any ideas?
149 2019-07-25T11:47:29  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
150 2019-07-25T11:49:31  *** zivl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
151 2019-07-25T11:54:40  *** jungly has quit IRC
152 2019-07-25T11:59:10  *** ossifrage_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
153 2019-07-25T11:59:16  *** ossifrage has quit IRC
154 2019-07-25T12:00:02  *** lugosi1 has quit IRC
155 2019-07-25T12:01:38  *** BGL has quit IRC
156 2019-07-25T12:04:12  *** ZeroZiat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
157 2019-07-25T12:20:44  *** liberiga has quit IRC
158 2019-07-25T12:24:47  *** ryufghj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
159 2019-07-25T12:24:55  *** ptiyoyip has quit IRC
160 2019-07-25T12:39:01  *** kcalvinalvin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
161 2019-07-25T12:44:12  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
162 2019-07-25T12:44:13  *** shesek has quit IRC
163 2019-07-25T12:44:13  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
164 2019-07-25T12:44:58  *** kcalvinalvin has quit IRC
165 2019-07-25T12:46:37  *** Emcy has quit IRC
166 2019-07-25T12:48:28  *** ryufghj has quit IRC
167 2019-07-25T12:49:29  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
168 2019-07-25T12:53:23  *** promag has quit IRC
169 2019-07-25T12:53:35  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
170 2019-07-25T13:11:35  *** shigeya has quit IRC
171 2019-07-25T13:12:24  *** shigeya has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172 2019-07-25T13:13:06  *** sipa has quit IRC
173 2019-07-25T13:19:02  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
174 2019-07-25T13:23:27  *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
175 2019-07-25T13:34:59  *** BGL has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
176 2019-07-25T13:50:47  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
177 2019-07-25T13:55:25  *** d_t has quit IRC
178 2019-07-25T13:56:36  *** davterra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
179 2019-07-25T14:01:20  *** laptop500 has quit IRC
180 2019-07-25T14:06:48  *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
181 2019-07-25T14:18:40  *** elichai2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
182 2019-07-25T14:19:13  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
183 2019-07-25T14:19:13  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Chunbao opened pull request #16457: test (0.18...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16457
184 2019-07-25T14:19:15  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
185 2019-07-25T14:20:03  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
186 2019-07-25T14:20:03  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #16457: test (0.18...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16457
187 2019-07-25T14:20:06  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
188 2019-07-25T14:20:50  *** davterra has quit IRC
189 2019-07-25T14:21:18  *** davterra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
190 2019-07-25T14:24:11  *** captjakk has quit IRC
191 2019-07-25T14:32:22  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
192 2019-07-25T14:38:02  *** as1nc has quit IRC
193 2019-07-25T14:47:03  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
194 2019-07-25T14:47:03  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Chunbao opened pull request #16458: Fix msvc compiler error C4146 (unary minus operator applied to unsign… (0.17...fix-C4146-in-util-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16458
195 2019-07-25T14:47:05  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
196 2019-07-25T14:53:27  *** hebasto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
197 2019-07-25T14:57:19  *** rajarshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
198 2019-07-25T14:58:33  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
199 2019-07-25T15:00:02  *** ZeroZiat has quit IRC
200 2019-07-25T15:04:51  *** NikolaiToryzin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
201 2019-07-25T15:07:50  *** davterra has quit IRC
202 2019-07-25T15:14:22  *** davterra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
203 2019-07-25T15:16:44  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
204 2019-07-25T15:18:47  *** davterra has quit IRC
205 2019-07-25T15:22:31  *** lightlike has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
206 2019-07-25T15:31:10  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
207 2019-07-25T15:31:11  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sdaftuar opened pull request #16459: [qa] Fix race condition in example_test.py (master...2019-07-fix-example-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16459
208 2019-07-25T15:31:24  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
209 2019-07-25T15:31:50  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
210 2019-07-25T15:31:50  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Chunbao opened pull request #16460: 0.17my (0.17...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16460
211 2019-07-25T15:32:03  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
212 2019-07-25T15:33:27  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
213 2019-07-25T15:33:28  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #16460: 0.17my (0.17...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16460
214 2019-07-25T15:33:29  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
215 2019-07-25T15:46:30  *** kljasdfvv has quit IRC
216 2019-07-25T15:49:10  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
217 2019-07-25T15:49:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #16461: doc: Fix code example in developer notes (master...2019-07-fix-devnotes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16461
218 2019-07-25T15:49:11  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
219 2019-07-25T15:49:54  *** owowo has quit IRC
220 2019-07-25T15:52:16  <sdaftuar_> jonasschnelli: that is a very strange failure. it looks like the test is trying to construct a 1000000byte block to test p2sh sigop counting, but somehow in your test failure the block was 1000001 bytes, which is why it broke
221 2019-07-25T15:52:39  <sdaftuar_> jonasschnelli: maybe there is some non-determinism in the test that we need to track down
222 2019-07-25T15:53:14  *** rajarshi has quit IRC
223 2019-07-25T15:53:38  *** davterra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
224 2019-07-25T15:54:01  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
225 2019-07-25T15:54:01  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
226 2019-07-25T15:56:10  *** setpill has quit IRC
227 2019-07-25T16:07:18  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
228 2019-07-25T16:14:03  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
229 2019-07-25T16:14:33  *** emilengler has quit IRC
230 2019-07-25T16:14:54  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
231 2019-07-25T16:15:12  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
232 2019-07-25T16:15:12  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Chunbao opened pull request #16462: jjjj (0.17...0.18) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16462
233 2019-07-25T16:15:13  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
234 2019-07-25T16:15:31  <emilengler> Hi, what was still the name of the channel where pull requests were being discussed every thursday?
235 2019-07-25T16:16:02  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
236 2019-07-25T16:16:02  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #16462: jjjj (0.17...0.18) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16462
237 2019-07-25T16:16:07  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
238 2019-07-25T16:17:54  *** emilengler has quit IRC
239 2019-07-25T16:18:05  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
240 2019-07-25T16:18:50  *** emilengler has quit IRC
241 2019-07-25T16:19:01  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
242 2019-07-25T16:25:52  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
243 2019-07-25T16:25:53  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
244 2019-07-25T16:25:53  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
245 2019-07-25T16:33:49  *** kcalvinalvin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
246 2019-07-25T16:37:08  *** rajarshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
247 2019-07-25T16:47:30  *** ezegom has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
248 2019-07-25T16:53:23  *** queip has quit IRC
249 2019-07-25T16:53:35  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
250 2019-07-25T16:54:51  *** hebasto has quit IRC
251 2019-07-25T16:55:26  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
252 2019-07-25T16:55:26  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/fe001925f803...fcc4025c1255
253 2019-07-25T16:55:27  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d9ab0ff Suhas Daftuar: [qa] Fix race condition in example_test.py
254 2019-07-25T16:55:27  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fcc4025 MarcoFalke: Merge #16459: [qa] Fix race condition in example_test.py
255 2019-07-25T16:55:29  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
256 2019-07-25T16:56:36  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
257 2019-07-25T16:56:36  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #16459: [qa] Fix race condition in example_test.py (master...2019-07-fix-example-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16459
258 2019-07-25T16:56:37  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
259 2019-07-25T16:57:01  *** rajarshi has quit IRC
260 2019-07-25T16:57:16  *** emilengler has quit IRC
261 2019-07-25T16:57:29  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262 2019-07-25T17:00:33  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
263 2019-07-25T17:01:34  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
264 2019-07-25T17:02:59  *** Eagle[TM] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
265 2019-07-25T17:03:50  *** kcalvinalvin has quit IRC
266 2019-07-25T17:05:16  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
267 2019-07-25T17:05:48  *** emilengler has quit IRC
268 2019-07-25T17:06:01  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
269 2019-07-25T17:06:04  <moneyball> emilengler: there is a weekly PR review club on wednesdays. IRC channel and other info found here https://bitcoin-core-review-club.github.io/
270 2019-07-25T17:06:27  <emilengler> moneyball, Thank you
271 2019-07-25T17:11:30  *** Eagle[TM] has quit IRC
272 2019-07-25T17:17:29  *** timothy has quit IRC
273 2019-07-25T17:45:56  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
274 2019-07-25T17:45:56  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 opened pull request #16463: [BIP 174] Implement serialization support for GLOBAL_XPUB field. (master...bip174-xpub) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16463
275 2019-07-25T17:46:00  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
276 2019-07-25T18:00:01  *** NikolaiToryzin has quit IRC
277 2019-07-25T18:01:01  <jnewbery_> Does anyone know the probabilities of 70 or 69 byte signatures? Is it always 1/2n of the number of bytes under 73?
278 2019-07-25T18:04:30  *** fredcooke1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
279 2019-07-25T18:04:32  *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
280 2019-07-25T18:08:52  *** instagibbs has quit IRC
281 2019-07-25T18:10:23  <harding> jnewbery_: I think 73 -> 72 is a special case (because an extra byte is added if the value is over 0x80).  For anything below 72, there would have to be a 0x00 byte in order for it to be implicit, so the odds are 1/256 per each byte fewer.  So 70 bytes or fewer would be (1/2 * 1/256 * 1/256).  I'm not confident about this, though.
282 2019-07-25T18:11:49  *** Raystonn_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
283 2019-07-25T18:12:04  *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
284 2019-07-25T18:14:56  *** Raystonn has quit IRC
285 2019-07-25T18:15:07  *** Raystonn_ is now known as Raystonn
286 2019-07-25T18:15:19  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
287 2019-07-25T18:17:10  <jonasschnelli> sdaftuar_: re block test: looks like. It's happening sometimes...
288 2019-07-25T18:17:15  *** reallll has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
289 2019-07-25T18:17:33  <sipa> jnewbery_: with low-r grinding?
290 2019-07-25T18:17:42  *** d_t has quit IRC
291 2019-07-25T18:17:49  <sdaftuar_> jonasschnelli: i think i found the problem
292 2019-07-25T18:18:00  <jonasschnelli> sdaftuar_: nice! What is it?
293 2019-07-25T18:18:37  <sdaftuar_> there's non-determinism in the length of the signature in the first transaction of the block (b39) used in the first p2sh sigops test
294 2019-07-25T18:18:56  <sdaftuar_> combined with a bug in the way the block size is measured in the loop, we can accidentally make too big a block if the first transaction has a too-small signature
295 2019-07-25T18:19:16  <sdaftuar_> i've got a simple fix, i think, which i'm verifying
296 2019-07-25T18:19:29  <jonasschnelli> Cool! Thanks for fixing it sdaftuar_.
297 2019-07-25T18:19:37  <jonasschnelli> So it should have also happend in travis
298 2019-07-25T18:19:49  <jonasschnelli> (it probably did)
299 2019-07-25T18:19:55  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
300 2019-07-25T18:20:07  <sdaftuar_> yeah that's what motivated john's question, we were trying to figure out what the likelihood of this happening is
301 2019-07-25T18:20:31  <jonasschnelli> i see
302 2019-07-25T18:20:33  <sdaftuar_> i suspect the likelihood went up after we switched to using a new secp256k1 implementation for our python test suite?
303 2019-07-25T18:20:39  <sdaftuar_> sipa: ^^ does that make sense to you?
304 2019-07-25T18:21:16  *** belcher has quit IRC
305 2019-07-25T18:23:27  <sipa> sdaftuar_: the python EC code doesn't do low-r grinding, so it'd be around a 50% chance for 71 byte sigs and 50% for 72 byte sigs (including the sighash byte)
306 2019-07-25T18:23:35  <sipa> and a tiny probability for 70 bytes and below
307 2019-07-25T18:33:51  <emilengler> In which file/function the inital blockchain download is being started?
308 2019-07-25T18:35:05  <sipa> emilengler: PeerValidationLogic::SendMessages(CNode* pto) in src/net_processing.cpp
309 2019-07-25T18:35:22  <sipa> specifically under the comment "// Start block sync"
310 2019-07-25T18:38:38  <sipa> it's a function that gets called periodically for each peer
311 2019-07-25T18:39:00  *** davterra has quit IRC
312 2019-07-25T18:39:08  <sipa> that piece of code specifically starts the fetching of headers
313 2019-07-25T18:39:35  <sipa> once we have enough headers, and know of peers who have blocks corresponding to those headers, we'll automatically start requesting blocks from them
314 2019-07-25T18:40:09  *** davterra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
315 2019-07-25T18:40:19  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
316 2019-07-25T18:41:08  *** reallll is now known as belcher
317 2019-07-25T18:43:14  *** owowo has quit IRC
318 2019-07-25T18:44:38  <emilengler> sipa, Thank you
319 2019-07-25T18:45:15  *** emilengler has quit IRC
320 2019-07-25T18:45:58  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
321 2019-07-25T18:45:58  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sdaftuar opened pull request #16464: [qa] Ensure we don't generate a too-big block in p2sh sigops test (master...2019-07-fix-feature-block) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16464
322 2019-07-25T18:45:59  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
323 2019-07-25T18:46:39  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
324 2019-07-25T18:47:30  *** emilengler has quit IRC
325 2019-07-25T18:47:44  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
326 2019-07-25T18:48:39  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
327 2019-07-25T18:50:42  *** ryufghj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
328 2019-07-25T18:59:35  *** jonatack has quit IRC
329 2019-07-25T18:59:52  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
330 2019-07-25T19:00:14  <jnewbery_> meeting time?
331 2019-07-25T19:00:20  <wumpus> #startmeeting
332 2019-07-25T19:00:20  <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Jul 25 19:00:20 2019 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
333 2019-07-25T19:00:20  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
334 2019-07-25T19:00:24  <sipa> ohai
335 2019-07-25T19:00:26  <jonasschnelli> hi
336 2019-07-25T19:00:26  <kanzure> hi
337 2019-07-25T19:00:27  <jnewbery_> hi!
338 2019-07-25T19:00:33  <achow101> hi
339 2019-07-25T19:00:34  <amiti> hi
340 2019-07-25T19:00:41  <andytoshi> hi
341 2019-07-25T19:00:44  <meshcollider> hi
342 2019-07-25T19:00:45  <BlueMatt> a wild jnewbery_ imposter apears
343 2019-07-25T19:00:53  <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
344 2019-07-25T19:01:10  *** sdaftuar_ is now known as sdaftuar
345 2019-07-25T19:01:18  <moneyball> Hi
346 2019-07-25T19:01:18  <ariard> hi
347 2019-07-25T19:01:19  <wumpus> one proposed topic today: Transaction Rebroadcasting https://gist.github.com/amitiuttarwar/b592ee410e1f02ac0d44fcbed4621dba
348 2019-07-25T19:01:26  <jonasschnelli> I have just a little topic/announcement suggestion: bitcoinbuilds.org (can be done at the end when time)
349 2019-07-25T19:01:27  <promag> hi
350 2019-07-25T19:01:51  <jamesob> hi
351 2019-07-25T19:02:01  <jonatack> hi
352 2019-07-25T19:02:16  <wumpus> hi everyone!
353 2019-07-25T19:02:23  <wumpus> #topic High priority for review
354 2019-07-25T19:02:43  <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8  6 blockers, 6 things waiting for concept ACK
355 2019-07-25T19:02:46  <BlueMatt> #16421
356 2019-07-25T19:02:48  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16421 | Conservatively accept RBF bumps bumping one tx at the package limits by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #16421 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
357 2019-07-25T19:03:03  <sdaftuar> i'd like to review beg #15759, which is already a high priority for review item
358 2019-07-25T19:03:07  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15759 | [p2p] Add 2 outbound blocks-only connections by sdaftuar · Pull Request #15759 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
359 2019-07-25T19:03:21  <wumpus> BlueMatt: that's one you want to add I suppose?
360 2019-07-25T19:03:44  <BlueMatt> yesplz
361 2019-07-25T19:03:54  <wumpus> ok added
362 2019-07-25T19:03:55  <jamesob> 15759 is a good PR, A+++++ 10/10 would review again
363 2019-07-25T19:04:45  <sipa> do two jamesob ACKs count as two? i see a win-win situation here
364 2019-07-25T19:06:01  <MarcoFalke> Can I add #16363
365 2019-07-25T19:06:02  <jamesob> I'll read it in decreasing line number order this time
366 2019-07-25T19:06:03  <wumpus> he did ack it twice so...
367 2019-07-25T19:06:03  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16363 | test: Add test for BIP30 duplicate tx by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #16363 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
368 2019-07-25T19:06:38  <wumpus> MarcoFalke:sure, added
369 2019-07-25T19:07:32  <wumpus> anything to add/remove from chasing concept ack?
370 2019-07-25T19:08:38  <ariard> still need reviews for #15713, which is current step to go forward on removing cs_main locks in wallet
371 2019-07-25T19:08:41  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15713 | refactor: Replace chain relayTransactions/submitMemoryPool by higher method by ariard · Pull Request #15713 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
372 2019-07-25T19:09:09  <ariard> (current tip ACKed by jnewbery and jonatack)
373 2019-07-25T19:09:16  <MarcoFalke> ariard: Looks like you pushed a new commit today
374 2019-07-25T19:09:26  <achow101> #16341 for Chasing Concept ACK?
375 2019-07-25T19:09:28  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16341 | WIP: Introduce ScriptPubKeyMan interface and use it for key and script management (aka wallet boxes) by achow101 · Pull Request #16341 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
376 2019-07-25T19:09:30  <wumpus> good to know, I see it's already on there
377 2019-07-25T19:09:40  <MarcoFalke> Oh, I see they re-ACKed
378 2019-07-25T19:09:51  <ariard> I took jnewbery cleanup commit for BroadcastTransaction
379 2019-07-25T19:10:30  <MarcoFalke> ariard: It conflicts with #16452. So which one should go in first?
380 2019-07-25T19:10:33  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16452 | refactor: use RelayTransaction in BroadcastTransaction utility by ariard · Pull Request #16452 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
381 2019-07-25T19:10:49  <jnewbery_> I think 15713 goes first
382 2019-07-25T19:11:02  *** rh0nj has quit IRC
383 2019-07-25T19:11:06  <jnewbery_> 16452 is a nice clean-up, but doesn't hold up the series of PRs
384 2019-07-25T19:11:12  <wumpus> achow101:added
385 2019-07-25T19:11:12  <ariard> #15713, so that's way I would be able to addreess nits in 16452
386 2019-07-25T19:11:14  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15713 | refactor: Replace chain relayTransactions/submitMemoryPool by higher method by ariard · Pull Request #15713 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
387 2019-07-25T19:11:43  <MarcoFalke> Good, I'll take a look at 15713 :eyes:
388 2019-07-25T19:11:55  <ariard> thanks!
389 2019-07-25T19:12:28  <wumpus> #topic Transaction broadcasting (amiti)
390 2019-07-25T19:12:28  *** gribble has quit IRC
391 2019-07-25T19:12:33  <promag> +1 on 15713
392 2019-07-25T19:12:47  <amiti> write up here: https://gist.github.com/amitiuttarwar/b592ee410e1f02ac0d44fcbed4621dba
393 2019-07-25T19:13:06  <amiti> tldr; want to improve privacy with updates to rebroadcast logic
394 2019-07-25T19:13:37  <amiti> instead of nodes rebroadcasting only wallet txns, rebroadcast all txns it believes should have been in the last block
395 2019-07-25T19:14:04  <amiti> looking for critical feedback, concept acks, any high level implementation thoughts
396 2019-07-25T19:14:08  *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
397 2019-07-25T19:14:23  <wumpus> how much is this expected to increase bandwidth usage?
398 2019-07-25T19:14:51  <amiti> choosing the parameters carefully will be important - dramatically impacts the worst case bandwidth usage
399 2019-07-25T19:15:15  <wumpus> and does this help with privacy? the first node broadcasting something will still be the same one
400 2019-07-25T19:15:24  <wumpus> as I see it, at least
401 2019-07-25T19:16:14  <amiti> not necessarily. if a node has a txn in its mempool that should have been picked up in a block already (high fee rate and is old), it will rebroadcast. independent of originating wallet.
402 2019-07-25T19:16:32  <MarcoFalke> wumpus: Yes, the first node (i.e. the wallet) will be the same one
403 2019-07-25T19:16:40  <MarcoFalke> But hopefully not for rebroadcasts
404 2019-07-25T19:16:42  <jnewbery_> wumpus: I think it does. Currently, if you see a peer brodcast a tx more than once, you can be almost certain that it originated the tx, and we rebroadcast our txs that are unconfirmed for more than half an hour
405 2019-07-25T19:17:06  <sipa> i think it primarily addresses how currently we gratuitously rebroadcast, making it obvious continuously to every peer what our own transactions are
406 2019-07-25T19:17:15  <sipa> it certainly doesn't address all forms of leaking that information
407 2019-07-25T19:17:28  <MarcoFalke> small steps :)
408 2019-07-25T19:17:44  <wumpus> so either every node does this, or it reveals which nodes have a hot wallet
409 2019-07-25T19:18:13  <sipa> wumpus: the rebroadcast logic will be in the mempool, so even without wallet enabled, it will work
410 2019-07-25T19:18:17  *** gribble has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
411 2019-07-25T19:18:41  <wumpus> and if all nodes do it, that sounds very bad for bandwidth usage
412 2019-07-25T19:19:02  <achow101> at first glance, this sounds like it will cause bandwidth usage greatly increase
413 2019-07-25T19:19:09  <sdaftuar> wumpus: i think if we constrain it to old transactions at the top of themempool, it should be a small bandwidth effect?
414 2019-07-25T19:19:28  <sipa> i suspect it's also filted by the knowninvs logic, so we wouldn't rebroadcast to the same peer twice
415 2019-07-25T19:19:36  <wumpus> so basically all nodes would create noise for the nodes with a wallet to hide in, hmm
416 2019-07-25T19:19:56  <MarcoFalke> sipa: The knowninvs will reset every couple of blocks, no?
417 2019-07-25T19:19:59  <sdaftuar> wumpus: i think it's more than that, it's way to ensure that things that should be mined get relayed, eg to nodes with small mempools or recently started up
418 2019-07-25T19:20:06  *** owowo has quit IRC
419 2019-07-25T19:20:06  <sdaftuar> sort of like a mempool-sync might do
420 2019-07-25T19:20:13  <achow101> would it be picking the oldest high fee rate transactions to rebroadcast, up to some n? Or would it pick some n transactions and choose the oldest and highest fee rate of them?
421 2019-07-25T19:20:18  <wumpus> sdaftuar: oh good point
422 2019-07-25T19:20:22  <sipa> right, full nodes have an incentives themselves to see their mempools match what it actually mined
423 2019-07-25T19:20:29  <sipa> even without wallets
424 2019-07-25T19:20:40  <amiti> achow: traverse top of mempool by ancestor fee rate, filter out recent transactions, rebroadcast remaining
425 2019-07-25T19:20:58  <jnewbery_> if we consider the top of the mempool to be "transactions we expect to get mined soon" and they're not getting mined, rebroadcasting them to make sure miners are aware seems like sensible mempool logic
426 2019-07-25T19:21:21  <jnewbery_> if not, then the mempool might as well expire them - they're doing our node no good
427 2019-07-25T19:21:24  <sipa> i guess there could be some sort of exponential backoff, that after a tx has been rebroadcast multiple times, it becomes rarer (this may be especially relevant when peers may have other consensus/policy rules)
428 2019-07-25T19:21:49  <achow101> amiti: so every rebroadcast would have the same number of transactions?
429 2019-07-25T19:21:55  <sipa> though i guess that's done automatically by our own expiration logic
430 2019-07-25T19:21:59  <achow101> or rather same amount of data being broadcast
431 2019-07-25T19:22:17  <wumpus> so if every node broadcasts the transactions at the top of the mempool, this will be more or less the same transactions for every node
432 2019-07-25T19:22:20  <MarcoFalke> achow101: No. Txs that were added to the mempool or to blocks are excluded
433 2019-07-25T19:22:23  <sipa> achow101: i guess that depends on how well the mempool matches what is being mined
434 2019-07-25T19:22:34  <MarcoFalke> wumpus: Yes, mostly
435 2019-07-25T19:22:38  <wumpus> if someone broadcasts a *different* transaction, or one that would rank lower according to policy, this is suspect
436 2019-07-25T19:22:41  <sdaftuar> sipa: i think a rebroadcast cap makes sense, also a cap on the number of things rebroadcast in one go (to prevent any kind of edge-case behavior)
437 2019-07-25T19:22:51  <sipa> gleb: here?
438 2019-07-25T19:22:59  <sdaftuar> he's away
439 2019-07-25T19:23:02  <sipa> i'm wondering how to integrate this with erlay
440 2019-07-25T19:23:20  <sipa> (which shouldn't be a blocker for this discussion of course, but it's nice to have things thought out)
441 2019-07-25T19:23:33  <wumpus> I'm not entirely sure that this generates noise with enough variance to contribute to privacy
442 2019-07-25T19:23:58  <sipa> wumpus: hmm?
443 2019-07-25T19:24:12  <wumpus> it'd just change the logic to 'anyone that broadcasts a transaction that is not on the top of the mempool is broadcasting their own transaction'
444 2019-07-25T19:24:15  <sipa> is your concern "this isn't enough" or "this doesn't contribute anything" (possible)
445 2019-07-25T19:24:19  <provoostenator> In particular, this wouldn't benefit lowball fee transactions I assume?
446 2019-07-25T19:24:32  <MarcoFalke> wumpus: The wallet rebroacast would be removed of course
447 2019-07-25T19:24:34  <jnewbery_> wumpus: nodes would still relay new transactions they saw
448 2019-07-25T19:24:41  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: ohhh!
449 2019-07-25T19:24:45  <MarcoFalke> heh
450 2019-07-25T19:24:47  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: okay then it makes a lot more sense
451 2019-07-25T19:25:21  <MarcoFalke> Maybe we should introduce each topic with a three line summary
452 2019-07-25T19:25:37  <provoostenator> (I mean: I would not add more privacy to wallet transactions with a low fee, but also doesn't make it worse)
453 2019-07-25T19:25:41  * MarcoFalke meta
454 2019-07-25T19:25:48  <provoostenator> *it
455 2019-07-25T19:26:21  <achow101> how would this interact with prioritizetransaction? I assume it would be a privacy leak that you prioritize some particular transaction if that transaction was part of the rebroadcast but not the top for other nodes
456 2019-07-25T19:26:24  <MarcoFalke> provoostenator: The fee rate should have no effect on privacy after the proposal is merged, no?
457 2019-07-25T19:26:40  <amiti> provoostenator: my proposed changes would not rebroadcast wallet txns with a low fee until that txn makes it to the top of the mempool
458 2019-07-25T19:26:43  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
459 2019-07-25T19:26:44  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
460 2019-07-25T19:26:45  <sipa> hmm, so how will low-feerate transactions get broadcast at all?
461 2019-07-25T19:26:47  <sdaftuar> achow101: i think we'd have to use a sort on actual feerate, and not modified feerate
462 2019-07-25T19:26:56  <MarcoFalke> sipa: When they are created
463 2019-07-25T19:26:57  <sdaftuar> sipa: pacakge relay, or wait til they get to the top of the mempool, i think?
464 2019-07-25T19:26:59  <MarcoFalke> (once)
465 2019-07-25T19:27:08  <sipa> oh, nvm; the normal "just entered the mempool" relay will do that, not rebroadcast logic
466 2019-07-25T19:27:13  <amiti> sdaftuar: correct
467 2019-07-25T19:27:34  *** gribble has quit IRC
468 2019-07-25T19:28:17  <provoostenator> So IIUC (I should read the whole thing): we still broadcast the first time as per usual, but we only *rebroadcast* top of mempool?
469 2019-07-25T19:28:27  <harding> So if I create a low fee transaction that doesn't get relayed initially for some reason, my wallet would never broadcast it unless I just happened to have my node open at the point where fees have dropped?
470 2019-07-25T19:28:39  <amiti> provoostenator: correct
471 2019-07-25T19:28:56  <wumpus> harding: it would broadcast it the first time
472 2019-07-25T19:29:08  <harding> wumpus: right, but what if it wasn't relayed the first time?
473 2019-07-25T19:29:25  <achow101> harding: I think it's the same situation now. you'd still have to wait for the fees to drop and have your wallet be open so that other nodes will accept it
474 2019-07-25T19:29:40  <MarcoFalke> harding: Right, but we can improve inital relay as well
475 2019-07-25T19:29:49  <MarcoFalke> (workin on it)TM
476 2019-07-25T19:31:11  <wumpus> concept ACK on the idea from me
477 2019-07-25T19:31:12  <harding> achow101: to overcome the dynamic minimum relay fee, that's true.  I'm thinking of the case where I generate a transaction with a (say) 288-block estimatesmartfee target.  That's only rarely going to be near the top of the mempool.  Right now, my wallet will rebroadcast that every hour or so (random delay); with this change, it'd only rebroadcast it if my wallet was open at the right time.
478 2019-07-25T19:31:36  <sipa> harding: but on the other hand, your peers will do the rebroadcast for you
479 2019-07-25T19:31:50  <sipa> those who heard the initial broadcast at least
480 2019-07-25T19:32:39  <sipa> you can argue that that's relying on their altruistic behaviour, but right now we're already kinda doing that hoping for them to relay it at all
481 2019-07-25T19:32:42  <sdaftuar> it seems reasonable for the wallet to try to ensure that the transaction was relayed to at least one peer, perhaps
482 2019-07-25T19:32:43  <harding> An actual usecase of my is that I sendrawtransaction spends from my cold wallet with my network disabled so that I can do a final inspection of the transaction in my local mempool (mainly to check that I didn't forget an output and spend all to fees).  That means I always use wallet rebroadcasting in those cases.
483 2019-07-25T19:32:43  <jnewbery_> harding: s/it'd only rebroadcast it if my wallet was open at the right time/it'd only rebroadcast if your node was online at the right time
484 2019-07-25T19:32:49  <jnewbery_> but I think your point stil lstands
485 2019-07-25T19:33:45  <achow101> harding: use testmempoolaccept instead?
486 2019-07-25T19:33:49  <sipa> harding: that seems like a reasonable use case (though personally i'm using analyzepsbt for that now, before even broadcasting it)
487 2019-07-25T19:34:06  <amiti> harding: you are right. in the circumstance where a low fee rate txn was not relayed the first time and none of your peers have it, these changes would make it take longer until your txn got rebroadcast, and potentially your node has to be online the right time.
488 2019-07-25T19:34:14  <sipa> i do think we need a way for this to work when a tx is submitted to your mempool while you're offline
489 2019-07-25T19:34:39  <provoostenator> One consideration I've seen discussed in a PR recently is that the node doesn't tell the wallet what happened.
490 2019-07-25T19:34:43  <harding> sipa: I also do that now too.  When dealing with thousands of my money, it's belts, suspenders, extra belts, and extra suspenders.  :-)
491 2019-07-25T19:34:44  <provoostenator> And one thing to also consider is that with dynamic loading, a user might unload their wallet after initial broadcast.
492 2019-07-25T19:34:57  <sipa> wow thousands of moneys
493 2019-07-25T19:35:08  <sdaftuar> a lot of ico's these days
494 2019-07-25T19:35:24  <sipa> the mempool could have a per-tx flag "ever broadcast"
495 2019-07-25T19:35:27  <MarcoFalke> Could the mempool keep track if the txs was pushed to at least one peer?
496 2019-07-25T19:35:32  <sipa> jinx
497 2019-07-25T19:35:55  <wumpus> IIRC the wallet used to keep track of number of broadcasts of a transaction, this was removed at some point
498 2019-07-25T19:35:56  <sipa> in that case, even the initial broadcast of a tx could become pure mempool responsibility
499 2019-07-25T19:36:02  <sipa> wumpus: correct
500 2019-07-25T19:36:12  <achow101> sipa: isn't it already?
501 2019-07-25T19:36:14  <sipa> though it was just used for showing in the UI whether a tx had propagated
502 2019-07-25T19:36:19  <MarcoFalke> wumpus: That wouldn't work if the wallet is on a different node than the mempool
503 2019-07-25T19:36:26  <sdaftuar> sipa: if you're the last of your peers to learn of a transaction, was it "ever broadcast"?
504 2019-07-25T19:36:29  <wumpus> which wasa arguably somewhat useful :) but yes
505 2019-07-25T19:36:31  <sipa> achow101: well i mean *the mempool* rather than ATMP
506 2019-07-25T19:37:06  <sipa> sdaftuar: anything you've learned from the network would never get that flag, only rpc/wallet submissions
507 2019-07-25T19:37:07  *** ajonas has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
508 2019-07-25T19:37:19  <MarcoFalke> sdaftuar: If you get the tx from the network it was broadcast
509 2019-07-25T19:37:20  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: is that even possible?
510 2019-07-25T19:37:39  *** gribble has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
511 2019-07-25T19:37:39  <wumpus> the wallet will always submit the transaction to the local mempool first right?
512 2019-07-25T19:37:46  <sipa> right
513 2019-07-25T19:37:49  <MarcoFalke> Sure. Use signrawtransaction on the one with the wallet and sendrawtransaction on the one with the mempool
514 2019-07-25T19:38:14  <wumpus> oh sure, but in that case you're handling everything manually anyway
515 2019-07-25T19:38:29  <provoostenator> Well, that makes the sendrawtransaction node's mempool is responsible?
516 2019-07-25T19:38:35  <wumpus> yes
517 2019-07-25T19:38:49  <MarcoFalke> You'd still want your node to broadcast at least once (even if at the time of ATMP you were offline)
518 2019-07-25T19:39:09  <sipa> right now if you use sendrawtransaction, it gets submitted to the mempool/network directly, from which your own wallet may learn it, who will then take over rebroadcasting
519 2019-07-25T19:39:21  <sipa> because sendrawtransaction is a node RPC not a wallet RPC afaik
520 2019-07-25T19:39:28  <wumpus> correct
521 2019-07-25T19:39:44  <wumpus> there's no addrawwallettransaction or something like that
522 2019-07-25T19:40:11  <wumpus> sendrawtransaction will unconditionally broadcast the transaction as well, so it's sometimes used for manual rebroadcast
523 2019-07-25T19:40:56  <MarcoFalke> sendrawtransaction should mention that this is privacy leaking, maybe?
524 2019-07-25T19:41:44  <wumpus> yes, the help could mention that
525 2019-07-25T19:42:25  <sipa> amiti: what do you think about the "ever broadcast" flag idea?
526 2019-07-25T19:42:29  <provoostenator> From the gist: "The wallet will attempt to resubmit unconfirmed transactions to the node on a scheduled timer" - does the node remember previously dropped txs?
527 2019-07-25T19:42:44  <sipa> provoostenator: the wallet always remembers all its own transactions
528 2019-07-25T19:42:49  <amiti> sipa: sounds great! noted.
529 2019-07-25T19:42:59  <sipa> the mempool is completely neutral and doesn't treat our own txn different from anyone else's
530 2019-07-25T19:43:09  <provoostenator> sipa: yes, but wouldn't this behavior just cause the node to do a fresh broadcast of all wallet transactions?
531 2019-07-25T19:43:12  <amiti> well. if we add the flag, it wont be completely neutral anymore
532 2019-07-25T19:43:16  <MarcoFalke> sipa: I like it. It sounds even orthogonal to amiti's proposed change
533 2019-07-25T19:43:22  <sipa> MarcoFalke: indeed
534 2019-07-25T19:43:32  <sipa> amiti: good point
535 2019-07-25T19:43:48  <sipa> but at some point we have to treat our own txn different our they wouldn't be broadcast at all :)
536 2019-07-25T19:43:51  <jnewbery_> sipa: we're wondering if the wallet rebroadcasting txs that it learns from the mempool is also true for txs received over p2p
537 2019-07-25T19:44:07  <amiti> but, given the circumstances harding pointed out, it seems worth it
538 2019-07-25T19:44:09  <jnewbery_> ie that your wallet can be dust-attacked and it'll start rebroadcasting the dust txs
539 2019-07-25T19:44:12  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
540 2019-07-25T19:44:20  <MarcoFalke> jnewbery_: It should
541 2019-07-25T19:44:34  <MarcoFalke> s/should/probably does/
542 2019-07-25T19:44:43  <sipa> jnewbery_: i think a tx learned through the network (wallet or not) should not be treated differently
543 2019-07-25T19:44:57  <sipa> only things learned from the wallet or rpc, and never broadcast before
544 2019-07-25T19:45:12  <MarcoFalke> jnewbery_:  I think this has been done in the past
545 2019-07-25T19:45:13  <amiti> provoostenator: if I understand your question correctly, the node will not remember the txns it previously dropped. it would rely on the wallet to resubmit if needed
546 2019-07-25T19:45:38  <MarcoFalke> Oh, no. It has been done to get the coinselection include the dust
547 2019-07-25T19:45:58  <jnewbery_> I guess we want this flag to be saved to mempool.dat so we don't rebroadcast our own txs every time we restart
548 2019-07-25T19:46:03  <sipa> jnewbery_: yeah
549 2019-07-25T19:46:26  <sipa> that's scary because mempool saving is only done periodically (or even only at shutdown)
550 2019-07-25T19:46:43  <sipa> so an unclean shutdown could result in unnecessary rebroadcast
551 2019-07-25T19:46:47  <MarcoFalke> -nopersistmempool :eyses:
552 2019-07-25T19:47:06  <provoostenator> Unnecessary rebroadcast as a result of a crash doesn't seem like a huge issue.
553 2019-07-25T19:47:40  <MarcoFalke> rebroadcast on every start because you don't persist the mempool does sound like an issue
554 2019-07-25T19:47:50  <harding> You could put the flag on the transaction in the wallet instead?  was_relayed_to_at_least_one_peer
555 2019-07-25T19:48:08  <sipa> harding: a bit of a layer violation but yeah
556 2019-07-25T19:48:23  <MarcoFalke> harding: That wouldn't work where the wallet is separate from the mempool (two nodes)
557 2019-07-25T19:48:25  <sipa> it means that the "submit to mempool" function needs to return a bool broadcast or not
558 2019-07-25T19:48:33  <sipa> oh right, it doesn't work for RPC
559 2019-07-25T19:48:34  <provoostenator> Maybe the wallet could ask the node "Do you have this in your mempool?"
560 2019-07-25T19:49:16  <provoostenator> And maybe also "Put in your mempool, but skip initial broadcast"
561 2019-07-25T19:49:37  <sipa> right but it needs to work even when there is no wallet involved at all
562 2019-07-25T19:49:42  <provoostenator> That moves responsibility to the wallet, which maybe makes sense because it cares about its own privacy.
563 2019-07-25T19:50:03  <provoostenator> sipa: true, that's the downside
564 2019-07-25T19:50:44  <MarcoFalke> We should remove broadcast logic from the wallet and the rpc and tell users to copy-paste the tx into a block explorer over tor
565 2019-07-25T19:51:16  <wumpus> at least if their node is not connected to tor already
566 2019-07-25T19:51:17  <sipa> ha
567 2019-07-25T19:51:18  <provoostenator> Node->WalletTransactionBroadcastDelegate
568 2019-07-25T19:51:39  <wumpus> but yes, this was kind of my point with -walletbroadcast=0
569 2019-07-25T19:51:55  <sipa> do we have other topics? :p
570 2019-07-25T19:52:40  <wumpus> #topic bitcoinbuilds.org (jonasschnelli)
571 2019-07-25T19:52:45  <hugohn> question: if there are empty blocks (could be consecutive), will every node rebroadcast top of the mempool?
572 2019-07-25T19:52:52  <jonasschnelli> It's a custom built open source CI that is/can-be-further tailored to our needs. Super slim.
573 2019-07-25T19:52:55  <MarcoFalke> hugohn: I think so
574 2019-07-25T19:52:58  <jonasschnelli> bitcoinbuilds.org
575 2019-07-25T19:53:02  <jonasschnelli> Feature wise its on the same level then travis. Builds fast or even faster then travis on a 50EUR/month machine.
576 2019-07-25T19:53:07  <jonasschnelli> Additionally, one can download the build results and it logs times per task (install/compile-depends/configure/compile/run-tests/etc.)
577 2019-07-25T19:53:10  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: nice !
578 2019-07-25T19:53:13  <jonasschnelli> Sources are here: https://github.com/jonasschnelli/bitcoin-core-ci
579 2019-07-25T19:53:17  <jonasschnelli> Intention is not to replace travis. Just to have a backup option for times when we need it.
580 2019-07-25T19:53:17  <wumpus> so we can trash travis now? :)
581 2019-07-25T19:53:23  <wumpus> oh
582 2019-07-25T19:53:38  <jonasschnelli> Maybe at some point.. but not now
583 2019-07-25T19:53:44  <jonasschnelli> I added a github hook.
584 2019-07-25T19:53:48  <wumpus> github integration is probably the most difficult part
585 2019-07-25T19:53:54  <jonasschnelli> So it builds are PRs (master after merges soon)
586 2019-07-25T19:54:01  <jonasschnelli> Integration with github is easy
587 2019-07-25T19:54:03  <wumpus> (e.g. reporting the status on github)
588 2019-07-25T19:54:23  <wumpus> oh! it used to be pretty much impossible for custom tools
589 2019-07-25T19:54:24  <jonasschnelli> In general... I was surprised how easy it is to "clone travis"
590 2019-07-25T19:54:48  <MarcoFalke> reply from travis: "Thank you for getting in touch and for raising this issue as well. I apologise for the frustration caused over the last month regarding the problems, and I can assure you we are committed to improving your overall experience while using the platform."
591 2019-07-25T19:54:49  <jonasschnelli> (though tailored)
592 2019-07-25T19:55:20  <jonasschnelli> However,.. feel free to check your PR build on bitcoinbuilds.org and contribute to futher extend it to our needs.
593 2019-07-25T19:55:43  <meshcollider> Currently it just compiles I guess, are you planning on adding test execution?
594 2019-07-25T19:55:44  <jonasschnelli> cfields more detailed dependency cache would certainly be a build-performance booster (for some types of builds)
595 2019-07-25T19:55:50  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: hopefully that means anything
596 2019-07-25T19:55:56  <jonasschnelli> meshcollider; it runs the test on linux64/32
597 2019-07-25T19:56:07  <MarcoFalke> wumpus: I'd guess its a template response
598 2019-07-25T19:56:16  <meshcollider> Oh nice :)
599 2019-07-25T19:56:17  <jonasschnelli> I have also plans to allow running tests on other machines over the internet (like run the ARM tests on a odroid or so)
600 2019-07-25T19:56:42  <MarcoFalke> Nice
601 2019-07-25T19:56:49  <jonasschnelli> Contributions welcome...
602 2019-07-25T19:57:04  <jnewbery_> jonasschnelli: does it use the same travis.yaml format for configuration?
603 2019-07-25T19:57:12  <jonasschnelli> almost...
604 2019-07-25T19:57:24  <jonasschnelli> https://github.com/jonasschnelli/bitcoin-core-ci/blob/master/default.yml
605 2019-07-25T19:57:32  <jonasschnelli> It's static for now to not pollute our git
606 2019-07-25T19:58:08  <wumpus> oh that's neat!
607 2019-07-25T19:58:21  <sipa> ideally our travis.yml doesn't really contain any logic apart from "invoke CI step 1", "invoke CI step 2.a", and caching ... which are implemented as a shell script
608 2019-07-25T19:58:50  <jonasschnelli> yes
609 2019-07-25T19:58:53  <jnewbery_> sipa: for logic yes, but there's various config in there too
610 2019-07-25T19:58:55  <MarcoFalke> Some of the variables in the script are travis specific, but it shouldn't be too hard to replace them
611 2019-07-25T19:59:05  <sipa> right
612 2019-07-25T19:59:18  <MarcoFalke> Happy to review a pull if someone wants to pull them out
613 2019-07-25T19:59:42  <jonasschnelli> We could use the .travis folder in the custom CI,.. sure.
614 2019-07-25T19:59:56  <jnewbery_> jonasschnelli: do you plan to update https://github.com/jonasschnelli/bitcoin-core-ci/blob/master/default.yml if the travis.yml file changes
615 2019-07-25T20:00:01  * sipa -> lunch
616 2019-07-25T20:00:11  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery_: I could..
617 2019-07-25T20:00:16  * MarcoFalke -> tea
618 2019-07-25T20:00:17  <jonasschnelli> or we add one in our github
619 2019-07-25T20:00:23  <jonasschnelli> or we load .travis
620 2019-07-25T20:00:29  <jonasschnelli> *dong*
621 2019-07-25T20:00:40  <wumpus> #endmeeting
622 2019-07-25T20:00:40  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Jul 25 20:00:40 2019 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
623 2019-07-25T20:00:40  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-07-25-19.00.html
624 2019-07-25T20:00:40  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-07-25-19.00.txt
625 2019-07-25T20:00:40  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-07-25-19.00.log.html
626 2019-07-25T20:00:48  <jnewbery_> jonasschnelli: thanks for doing this! Definitely useful to have an alternative
627 2019-07-25T20:01:01  <instagibbs> oh whoops, meeting, I thought you guys were really just havin a productive normal discussion
628 2019-07-25T20:01:09  <jonasschnelli> heh
629 2019-07-25T20:01:14  <amiti> thank you everyone for all the feedback :)
630 2019-07-25T20:02:05  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery_: also, eventually travis builds other stuff then bitcoinbuilds.org does (if both are running fine)...
631 2019-07-25T20:02:16  <jonasschnelli> so the .travis file doesn't need to be directly synced
632 2019-07-25T20:03:42  <hugohn> amiti: should there be a check for minimum of empty blocks seen before triggering rebroadcast ? seems bad to have every node rebroadcast top of the mempool as soon as there's one empty block. (Granted, empty blocks would not be a problem post-subsidy, but might still be a problem now.)
633 2019-07-25T20:06:16  <instagibbs> single empty blocks are still quite common, not due to lack of mempool contents
634 2019-07-25T20:06:23  <instagibbs> (I haven't read the latest proposal, sorry)
635 2019-07-25T20:06:34  <sipa> if there is per-tx mempool tracking anyway, there could be a "point sysyem" where every time a tx was expected to have been in a block but wasn't, it gets a point; if the number of points exceeds some threshold, rebroadcast and increment a counter that next time more points are needed
636 2019-07-25T20:15:15  <lightlike> is it also common that non-empty blocks are mined that include many low-fee txes even if higher ones are available? or is it mostly either empty or fee-efficient?
637 2019-07-25T20:17:06  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
638 2019-07-25T20:17:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/fcc4025c1255...a54a12046e98
639 2019-07-25T20:17:07  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 248e22b fanquake: depends: disable unused Qt features
640 2019-07-25T20:17:07  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a54a120 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #16386: depends: disable unused Qt features
641 2019-07-25T20:17:09  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
642 2019-07-25T20:22:47  *** ezegom has quit IRC
643 2019-07-25T20:27:08  <amiti> hugohn: the current thinking is not to trigger rebroadcast based on block timing, but rather an independent timer. the idea is if we choose the param of "is txn recent" to be long enough, we should be able to avoid excessive broadcast of txns even in edge cases.
644 2019-07-25T20:27:08  <amiti> sipa: thats an interesting idea. I'll add it to considerations. there are a lot of options for strategies to mitigate excessive rebroadcasting (and bandwidth usage) with the main tradeoffs being memory / code complexity. another way of storing per-tx mempool data would be a stamp of the `last_rebroadcast_at` and enforce a minimum there.
645 2019-07-25T20:27:20  <hugohn> lightlike: high-fee txns could get skipped simply due to timing/relaying issues, so I can see that happening. In fact, it sounds like amiti's proposal is geared towards solving that kind of scenario. Normally you would not expect miners to skip high-fee txns as it does not make economic sense to do so.
646 2019-07-25T20:29:57  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: looks like it's not picking up the "needs gitian build" on #16441
647 2019-07-25T20:29:58  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16441 | build: remove qt libjpeg check from bitcoin_qt.m4 by fanquake · Pull Request #16441 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
648 2019-07-25T20:34:48  <MarcoFalke> wumpus: Thx. Looking
649 2019-07-25T20:35:14  *** emilengler has quit IRC
650 2019-07-25T20:35:29  <MarcoFalke> FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: 'make': 'make'
651 2019-07-25T20:36:26  <MarcoFalke> I transferred to a new vm. I guess the host needs make to make the depends
652 2019-07-25T20:36:39  <jonasschnelli> lol
653 2019-07-25T20:37:06  <wumpus> hehe
654 2019-07-25T20:38:15  <MarcoFalke> Fixed. Let's check back in two days. (it is half a cpu)
655 2019-07-25T20:39:08  <hugohn> > not to trigger rebroadcast based on block timing, but rather an independent timer
656 2019-07-25T20:39:09  <hugohn> amiti: I see, looks like rebroadcast is triggered once / hour based on the current proposal. Would there be an issue though if there is a sudden drop in hash rate? I suppose an hour should give plenty of room to account for hash rate drop.
657 2019-07-25T20:40:11  *** vincenzopalazzo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
658 2019-07-25T20:42:28  *** ajonas has quit IRC
659 2019-07-25T20:42:39  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: thanks!
660 2019-07-25T20:48:45  *** vincenzopalazzo has quit IRC
661 2019-07-25T20:55:51  <elichai2> jonasschnelli: btw, this might interest you: https://github.com/drone/drone it's also open source and it's dockerized, I used it in the past when I wanted to host my own CI, so you don't have to pay anything except your server(then you can take a powerful one for fast compilation time)
662 2019-07-25T20:56:37  <amiti> hugohn: I think more relevant than the frequency of the rebroadcast job is the definition of "recent" transaction. the current proposal has that defined as 30 minutes, which may be too low.
663 2019-07-25T20:56:37  <amiti> right now with the params chosen (enforce max rebroadcast of 1000 txns/hour) my back-of-the-envelope math has the worst case as 36 kb max of inv message / hour.
664 2019-07-25T20:56:37  <amiti> I'd be curious to hear evaluations of how impactful that seems.
665 2019-07-25T20:56:37  <amiti> The worst case bandwidth usage would be very tune-able by choosing conservative params.
666 2019-07-25T21:00:02  *** fredcooke1 has quit IRC
667 2019-07-25T21:05:45  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
668 2019-07-25T21:05:46  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #16465: test: Test p2sh-witness and bech32 in wallet_import_rescan (master...1907-testAllAddressTypesImport) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16465
669 2019-07-25T21:05:58  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
670 2019-07-25T21:09:59  *** jonatack has quit IRC
671 2019-07-25T21:19:17  *** liberiga has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
672 2019-07-25T21:20:06  *** phyll1s_work has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
673 2019-07-25T21:29:56  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
674 2019-07-25T21:42:31  *** captjakk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
675 2019-07-25T21:47:47  *** goatpig has quit IRC
676 2019-07-25T22:30:10  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
677 2019-07-25T22:36:44  *** ptiyoyip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
678 2019-07-25T22:39:12  *** Zenton has quit IRC
679 2019-07-25T22:40:28  *** ryufghj has quit IRC
680 2019-07-25T23:01:00  *** liberiga has quit IRC
681 2019-07-25T23:01:55  *** itsiku has quit IRC
682 2019-07-25T23:06:19  *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
683 2019-07-25T23:07:44  *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
684 2019-07-25T23:10:52  *** vincenzopalazzo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
685 2019-07-25T23:15:08  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
686 2019-07-25T23:20:50  *** davterra has quit IRC
687 2019-07-25T23:21:10  *** liberiga has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
688 2019-07-25T23:22:42  *** ryufghj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
689 2019-07-25T23:25:34  *** ptiyoyip has quit IRC
690 2019-07-25T23:37:44  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
691 2019-07-25T23:37:49  *** vincenzopalazzo has quit IRC
692 2019-07-25T23:38:28  *** vincenzopalzzo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
693 2019-07-25T23:40:03  *** vincenzopalazzo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
694 2019-07-25T23:53:46  *** vincenzopalazzo has quit IRC