1 2020-08-11T00:00:02  *** fimp has quit IRC
  2 2020-08-11T00:02:18  *** watersnake1 has quit IRC
  3 2020-08-11T00:16:58  *** sipsorcery has quit IRC
  4 2020-08-11T00:21:00  *** Criggie1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  5 2020-08-11T00:44:45  *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  6 2020-08-11T00:50:49  *** diogorsergio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  7 2020-08-11T01:05:41  *** Evel-Knievel has quit IRC
  8 2020-08-11T01:06:22  *** Evel-Knievel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  9 2020-08-11T01:06:34  *** mdunnio has quit IRC
 10 2020-08-11T01:07:29  *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 11 2020-08-11T01:18:47  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 12 2020-08-11T01:19:42  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 13 2020-08-11T01:25:41  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 14 2020-08-11T01:25:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/85fa648c857f...cb1ee1551cf3
 15 2020-08-11T01:25:42  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master dac7a11 Sebastian Falbesoner: refactor: test: use _ variable for unused loop counters
 16 2020-08-11T01:25:43  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master cb1ee15 fanquake: Merge #19674: refactor: test: use throwaway _ variable for unused loop cou...
 17 2020-08-11T01:25:44  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 18 2020-08-11T01:26:00  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 19 2020-08-11T01:26:00  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #19674: refactor: test: use throwaway _ variable for unused loop counters (master...20200804-refactor-test-use-underscore-variable) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19674
 20 2020-08-11T01:26:01  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 21 2020-08-11T01:35:37  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 22 2020-08-11T01:37:25  *** Eagle[TM] has quit IRC
 23 2020-08-11T01:45:12  *** mdunnio has quit IRC
 24 2020-08-11T02:21:45  *** trash_mapache has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 25 2020-08-11T02:23:43  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 26 2020-08-11T02:36:50  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 27 2020-08-11T02:40:04  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 28 2020-08-11T02:40:13  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 29 2020-08-11T02:40:37  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 30 2020-08-11T02:59:37  *** Criggie1 has quit IRC
 31 2020-08-11T03:03:33  *** adam3us has quit IRC
 32 2020-08-11T03:04:13  *** adam3us has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 33 2020-08-11T03:04:41  *** K4TJANG has quit IRC
 34 2020-08-11T03:04:41  *** Cory has quit IRC
 35 2020-08-11T03:04:41  *** kanzure has quit IRC
 36 2020-08-11T03:06:09  *** kanzure has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 37 2020-08-11T03:11:03  *** Cory has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 38 2020-08-11T03:17:25  *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 39 2020-08-11T03:18:37  *** trash_mapache22 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 40 2020-08-11T03:20:04  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
 41 2020-08-11T03:21:22  *** trash_mapache has quit IRC
 42 2020-08-11T03:21:57  *** zeromus1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 43 2020-08-11T03:22:25  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
 44 2020-08-11T03:41:12  *** bitdex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 45 2020-08-11T03:43:48  *** jarthur_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 46 2020-08-11T03:44:07  *** jarthur has quit IRC
 47 2020-08-11T03:49:02  *** PaulTroo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 48 2020-08-11T03:54:05  *** PaulTroo_ has quit IRC
 49 2020-08-11T03:55:47  *** mdunnio has quit IRC
 50 2020-08-11T04:01:12  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 51 2020-08-11T04:01:44  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 52 2020-08-11T04:04:43  *** bitdex has quit IRC
 53 2020-08-11T04:08:45  *** bitdex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 54 2020-08-11T04:43:07  *** Mercury_Vapor has quit IRC
 55 2020-08-11T04:43:31  *** Mercury_Vapor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 56 2020-08-11T04:48:30  *** trash_mapache22 has quit IRC
 57 2020-08-11T04:55:22  *** troygiorshev has quit IRC
 58 2020-08-11T05:33:10  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 59 2020-08-11T05:33:34  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 60 2020-08-11T06:00:01  *** zeromus1 has quit IRC
 61 2020-08-11T06:19:03  *** sipsorcery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 62 2020-08-11T06:21:41  *** Mark_Cockrell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 63 2020-08-11T06:25:20  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 64 2020-08-11T06:30:37  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 65 2020-08-11T06:37:41  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 66 2020-08-11T06:39:23  *** bitdex has quit IRC
 67 2020-08-11T06:41:41  *** bitdex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 68 2020-08-11T06:45:14  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 69 2020-08-11T06:49:38  *** andreacab has quit IRC
 70 2020-08-11T06:50:48  <fanquake> Review beg for #19025. I'd like to get that merged, as it now also contains the fixes required for Appveyor & CI on the 0.19 branch.
 71 2020-08-11T06:50:50  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19025 | [0.19] Backports by fanquake · Pull Request #19025 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 72 2020-08-11T06:51:01  <fanquake> That way we can avoid polluting backport PRs like #19681 with unrelated changes & discussion.
 73 2020-08-11T06:51:03  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19681 | 0.19: Add txids with non-standard inputs to reject filter by sdaftuar · Pull Request #19681 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 74 2020-08-11T06:54:41  *** marcoagner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 75 2020-08-11T07:09:29  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 76 2020-08-11T07:21:40  *** PaulTroo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 77 2020-08-11T07:26:43  *** jonatack has quit IRC
 78 2020-08-11T07:28:15  *** davec has quit IRC
 79 2020-08-11T07:42:25  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 80 2020-08-11T07:54:14  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 81 2020-08-11T08:14:09  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 82 2020-08-11T08:14:32  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 83 2020-08-11T08:29:58  *** jeremyrubin has quit IRC
 84 2020-08-11T08:32:36  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 85 2020-08-11T08:42:27  *** Mark_Cockrell has quit IRC
 86 2020-08-11T08:43:05  <jnewbery> fanquake: I've reviewed. Looks good to me.
 87 2020-08-11T09:02:42  *** sipsorcery has quit IRC
 88 2020-08-11T09:04:18  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 89 2020-08-11T09:07:23  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 90 2020-08-11T09:11:34  *** jonasschnelli has quit IRC
 91 2020-08-11T09:11:34  *** jonasschnelli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 92 2020-08-11T09:12:37  <jonasschnelli> can someone unban me in #bitcoin #bitcoin-dev?
 93 2020-08-11T09:14:20  *** andreacab has quit IRC
 94 2020-08-11T09:14:28  *** Talkless has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 95 2020-08-11T09:14:34  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 96 2020-08-11T09:14:35  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 97 2020-08-11T09:20:57  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 98 2020-08-11T09:21:51  *** nerdboy1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 99 2020-08-11T09:38:02  <jnewbery> wumpus, fanquake: I think it might be time to merge #19070. It has 5 ACKs/concept ACKs
100 2020-08-11T09:38:04  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19070 | p2p: Signal support for compact block filters with NODE_COMPACT_FILTERS by jnewbery · Pull Request #19070 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
101 2020-08-11T09:38:35  <jnewbery> It's opt-in and very self-contained, so if there are any problems with it, then it'll be very easy to revert
102 2020-08-11T09:44:50  * aj misparses "compact block" filters
103 2020-08-11T09:48:21  <jnewbery> filters of blocks which are compact
104 2020-08-11T09:49:11  *** belcher_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
105 2020-08-11T09:50:05  <aj> yeah, i said /mis/parses
106 2020-08-11T09:52:43  *** Guest76530 has quit IRC
107 2020-08-11T09:52:48  *** belcher has quit IRC
108 2020-08-11T09:55:21  *** andreacab has quit IRC
109 2020-08-11T09:56:13  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
110 2020-08-11T09:57:50  *** andreacab has quit IRC
111 2020-08-11T09:57:56  *** andreaca_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
112 2020-08-11T10:00:03  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
113 2020-08-11T10:00:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 12 commits to 0.19: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/05f5dd96c71e...28a9df7d76a6
114 2020-08-11T10:00:06  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.19 0d0dd6a Andrew Chow: Update with new Windows code signing certificate
115 2020-08-11T10:00:08  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.19 e422f65 Hennadii Stepanov: build: Set libevent minimum version to 2.0.21
116 2020-08-11T10:00:09  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.19 bde6a5a Luke Dashjr: Bugfix: Include "csv","!segwit" in "rules"
117 2020-08-11T10:00:11  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
118 2020-08-11T10:00:28  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
119 2020-08-11T10:00:28  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #19025: [0.19] Backports (0.19...0_19_2_backports) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19025
120 2020-08-11T10:00:29  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
121 2020-08-11T10:01:31  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122 2020-08-11T10:03:18  *** Bertha4Jacobson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
123 2020-08-11T10:03:46  *** andreaca_ has quit IRC
124 2020-08-11T10:04:33  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
125 2020-08-11T10:05:32  *** Pavlenex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
126 2020-08-11T10:08:49  *** andreacab has quit IRC
127 2020-08-11T10:10:11  *** Bertha4Jacobson has quit IRC
128 2020-08-11T10:10:32  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
129 2020-08-11T10:11:30  *** mrostecki has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
130 2020-08-11T10:20:32  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
131 2020-08-11T10:32:08  *** promag has quit IRC
132 2020-08-11T10:43:09  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
133 2020-08-11T10:43:34  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
134 2020-08-11T10:43:35  *** bitdex has quit IRC
135 2020-08-11T10:46:07  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
136 2020-08-11T10:46:08  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] naumenkogs opened pull request #19697: Minor improvements on ADDR caching (master...2020-08-addr-cache-follow-up) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19697
137 2020-08-11T10:46:08  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
138 2020-08-11T10:47:09  *** behradkhodayar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
139 2020-08-11T10:48:28  *** behradkhodayar has quit IRC
140 2020-08-11T10:51:24  *** andreacab has quit IRC
141 2020-08-11T10:53:03  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
142 2020-08-11T10:53:42  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
143 2020-08-11T10:54:56  *** andreacab has quit IRC
144 2020-08-11T10:55:04  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
145 2020-08-11T10:55:27  *** behradkhodayar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
146 2020-08-11T10:55:41  *** vasild_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
147 2020-08-11T10:58:23  *** vasild has quit IRC
148 2020-08-11T10:58:24  *** vasild_ is now known as vasild
149 2020-08-11T11:09:00  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
150 2020-08-11T11:09:14  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
151 2020-08-11T11:09:24  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
152 2020-08-11T11:11:18  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
153 2020-08-11T11:15:03  *** mrostecki has quit IRC
154 2020-08-11T11:15:07  *** andreacab has quit IRC
155 2020-08-11T11:15:41  *** PaulTroo_ has quit IRC
156 2020-08-11T11:15:59  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
157 2020-08-11T11:18:42  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
158 2020-08-11T11:20:01  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
159 2020-08-11T11:20:50  *** andreacab has quit IRC
160 2020-08-11T11:25:58  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
161 2020-08-11T11:27:41  *** andreacab has quit IRC
162 2020-08-11T11:28:09  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
163 2020-08-11T11:28:58  *** PaulTroo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
164 2020-08-11T11:32:25  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
165 2020-08-11T11:32:43  *** DeanWeen has quit IRC
166 2020-08-11T11:36:31  *** mrostecki has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
167 2020-08-11T11:42:14  *** promag has quit IRC
168 2020-08-11T11:43:27  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
169 2020-08-11T11:52:15  *** jonatack has quit IRC
170 2020-08-11T11:54:43  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
171 2020-08-11T11:57:39  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172 2020-08-11T12:00:02  *** nerdboy1 has quit IRC
173 2020-08-11T12:03:48  *** gzhao408 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
174 2020-08-11T12:05:06  *** troygiorshev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
175 2020-08-11T12:05:31  *** sipsorcery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
176 2020-08-11T12:07:43  *** shesek has quit IRC
177 2020-08-11T12:12:00  *** promag has quit IRC
178 2020-08-11T12:18:10  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
179 2020-08-11T12:18:28  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
180 2020-08-11T12:20:00  *** armin76 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
181 2020-08-11T12:21:23  *** jb55 has quit IRC
182 2020-08-11T12:34:23  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
183 2020-08-11T12:35:48  *** InflationHedge has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
184 2020-08-11T12:38:38  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
185 2020-08-11T12:38:54  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
186 2020-08-11T12:40:28  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
187 2020-08-11T12:40:59  *** sipsorcery has quit IRC
188 2020-08-11T12:41:17  *** sipsorcery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
189 2020-08-11T12:41:20  *** InflationHedge has quit IRC
190 2020-08-11T12:46:26  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
191 2020-08-11T13:04:13  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
192 2020-08-11T13:04:35  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
193 2020-08-11T13:06:14  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
194 2020-08-11T13:06:36  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
195 2020-08-11T13:07:15  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
196 2020-08-11T13:07:37  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
197 2020-08-11T13:08:12  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
198 2020-08-11T13:08:32  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
199 2020-08-11T13:09:11  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
200 2020-08-11T13:09:31  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
201 2020-08-11T13:11:12  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
202 2020-08-11T13:11:30  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
203 2020-08-11T13:12:10  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
204 2020-08-11T13:12:28  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
205 2020-08-11T13:13:10  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
206 2020-08-11T13:13:28  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
207 2020-08-11T13:16:05  *** jnewbery has quit IRC
208 2020-08-11T13:16:14  *** jnewbery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
209 2020-08-11T13:20:09  *** behradkhodayar has quit IRC
210 2020-08-11T13:23:16  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
211 2020-08-11T13:23:40  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
212 2020-08-11T13:24:08  *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
213 2020-08-11T13:24:50  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
214 2020-08-11T13:26:21  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
215 2020-08-11T13:26:39  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
216 2020-08-11T13:35:00  *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
217 2020-08-11T13:39:30  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
218 2020-08-11T13:39:57  *** Pavlenex has quit IRC
219 2020-08-11T13:45:21  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
220 2020-08-11T13:45:41  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
221 2020-08-11T13:49:28  *** fox2p has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
222 2020-08-11T13:57:40  <jnewbery> hi folks. Reminder that we have the inaugural p2p irc meeing in one hour. Feel free to add any proposed discussion topics here: https://gist.github.com/jnewbery/dfaf34706f93a0608bb24869f13abcbf
223 2020-08-11T13:58:31  <jnewbery> only topic so far is priorities/focus. Please come prepared with one or two sentences about what your current priority/focus is to share with the group. Thanks!
224 2020-08-11T14:01:05  * fanquake wonders if he should attend to achieve back to back to back bitcoin meetings 🤔 
225 2020-08-11T14:02:35  <aj> jnewbery: maybe make the agenda a wiki on https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki ?
226 2020-08-11T14:18:37  <jnewbery> aj: good idea. I'll move it there for the next meeting
227 2020-08-11T14:21:16  <aj> jnewbery: great, now i don't need to feel guilty about spamming a comment
228 2020-08-11T14:21:59  *** theStack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
229 2020-08-11T14:24:19  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
230 2020-08-11T14:26:40  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
231 2020-08-11T14:26:40  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
232 2020-08-11T14:26:48  *** shesek has quit IRC
233 2020-08-11T14:27:01  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
234 2020-08-11T14:27:01  *** shesek has quit IRC
235 2020-08-11T14:27:01  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
236 2020-08-11T14:27:01  *** theStack has quit IRC
237 2020-08-11T14:27:27  *** theStack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
238 2020-08-11T14:32:05  *** jonatack has quit IRC
239 2020-08-11T14:34:58  *** mrostecki has quit IRC
240 2020-08-11T14:37:56  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
241 2020-08-11T14:39:07  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
242 2020-08-11T14:39:33  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
243 2020-08-11T14:41:13  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
244 2020-08-11T14:41:34  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
245 2020-08-11T14:43:14  <jnewbery> aj: oh, is everyone able to update that wiki, or just people in the bitcoin org on github?
246 2020-08-11T14:45:29  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
247 2020-08-11T14:56:45  <aj> jnewbery: no idea
248 2020-08-11T14:57:08  <aj> also, yay, replied to 19498 with *multiple* minutes to spare before the meeting
249 2020-08-11T14:58:46  <jonatack> jnewbery: i think anyone can edit
250 2020-08-11T14:59:34  <jonatack> edited release notes there a year ago ;p
251 2020-08-11T15:00:02  *** armin76 has quit IRC
252 2020-08-11T15:00:07  <jnewbery> #startmeeting
253 2020-08-11T15:00:07  <lightningbot> Meeting started Tue Aug 11 15:00:07 2020 UTC.  The chair is jnewbery. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
254 2020-08-11T15:00:07  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
255 2020-08-11T15:00:15  <jnewbery> #bitcoin-core-dev P2P 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 ariard digi_james
256 2020-08-11T15:00:15  <jonatack> hola
257 2020-08-11T15:00:21  <jnewbery> amiti fjahr jeremyrubin lightlike emilengler jonatack hebasto jb55 elichai2
258 2020-08-11T15:00:21  <troygiorshev> hi
259 2020-08-11T15:00:24  <jnewbery> Hi folks! Welcome to the first p2p IRC meeting.
260 2020-08-11T15:00:26  <dongcarl> hi
261 2020-08-11T15:00:27  <ajonas> hi
262 2020-08-11T15:00:28  <amiti> hi!
263 2020-08-11T15:00:28  <fanquake> hi
264 2020-08-11T15:00:30  <jnewbery> Please say hi to let everyone know you're here and planning to participate.
265 2020-08-11T15:00:31  <pinheadmz> hi
266 2020-08-11T15:00:35  <sdaftuar> hi
267 2020-08-11T15:00:43  <jnewbery> We have a one suggested topics at https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/P2P-IRC-meetings (and aj has added his priorities as well - thanks!)
268 2020-08-11T15:00:44  <ariard> hi
269 2020-08-11T15:00:57  <theStack> hi
270 2020-08-11T15:00:57  <aj> hi
271 2020-08-11T15:01:12  <jnewbery> (please don't use the gist any more. I've moved the notes to the bitcoin-core wiki)
272 2020-08-11T15:01:24  <elichai2> Hi
273 2020-08-11T15:01:48  <jnewbery> I suggest we start with priorities/focus as a topic
274 2020-08-11T15:01:49  <sipa> hi
275 2020-08-11T15:02:03  *** Lightlike has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
276 2020-08-11T15:02:19  <jnewbery> #topic priority/focus
277 2020-08-11T15:02:47  <jnewbery> aj: would you like to start. You've listed what you're working on https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/P2P-IRC-meetings but do you have anything else to add?
278 2020-08-11T15:03:03  *** Lightlike has quit IRC
279 2020-08-11T15:03:27  <aj> i'm mostly caring about taproot-critical-path-things, which i think is now mostly not p2p stuff
280 2020-08-11T15:03:53  <aj> but copied stuff off my whiteboard in case it's missing anything interesting or important
281 2020-08-11T15:04:01  <adiabat> hi
282 2020-08-11T15:04:43  <jnewbery> sdaftuar: any priorities?
283 2020-08-11T15:04:51  <sdaftuar> i've got a bunch of things i am thinking about...
284 2020-08-11T15:05:17  <sdaftuar> i'd say my current priorities are to get the transaction download stuff (sipa's 19184 i think) reviewed.  and erlay is on my mind right after that
285 2020-08-11T15:05:45  <sdaftuar> but i'm also thinking about a bunch of other things that i want to mention, because if others are interested in any then maybe we can make progress on other fronts as well
286 2020-08-11T15:06:08  <jnewbery> do you want to list them now?
287 2020-08-11T15:06:10  <sdaftuar> some stuff is related to network-topology improvements:
288 2020-08-11T15:06:34  <sdaftuar> more block-relay only peers (which is probably gated on negotiating block-relay connections at connect-time)
289 2020-08-11T15:07:11  <sdaftuar> more improvements to syncing our tips with more peers (possibly including tx-relay-peer rotation, which can help here as well)
290 2020-08-11T15:07:23  <sdaftuar> improved eviction logic (pr open)
291 2020-08-11T15:07:45  <sdaftuar> and other stuff is related to transaction relay policy, particularly package relay, which is a whole beast of a topic by itself
292 2020-08-11T15:07:58  <sdaftuar> but also rbf pinning (which may be a related problem)
293 2020-08-11T15:08:01  <aj> #19670 ?
294 2020-08-11T15:08:04  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19670 | Protect localhost and block-relay-only peers from eviction by sdaftuar · Pull Request #19670 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
295 2020-08-11T15:08:08  <sdaftuar> yep
296 2020-08-11T15:08:37  <sdaftuar> so that's a lot of stuff, and depending on what others view as priorities, that will influence where i focus my time
297 2020-08-11T15:08:56  <jnewbery> thanks sdaftuar
298 2020-08-11T15:09:02  <jnewbery> jonatack: priorities?
299 2020-08-11T15:09:57  <jonatack> review
300 2020-08-11T15:10:02  <jonatack> refactoring/cleanup
301 2020-08-11T15:10:15  <jonatack> for a couple of weeks i was working on inbound eviction policy
302 2020-08-11T15:10:19  <jonatack> methodology was (1) an observation dashboard (#19643), 2) test coverage, and 3) optimisation
303 2020-08-11T15:10:22  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19643 | Add `-netinfo` peer connections dashboard by jonatack · Pull Request #19643 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
304 2020-08-11T15:10:32  <jonatack> i didn't realize that suhas was working on it as well
305 2020-08-11T15:11:01  <jonatack> i was then asked by a few devs to consider picking up bip324 implementation
306 2020-08-11T15:11:19  <jonatack> talked with jonas schnelli today and he will be back on it soon
307 2020-08-11T15:11:32  <jonatack> he needs help with one sticking point
308 2020-08-11T15:12:08  <jonatack> i don't have the gist handy, will provide a bit later, we were discussing this with ariard, warren, moneyball, wumpus and jonasschnelli
309 2020-08-11T15:12:31  <jonatack> atm i need to do some work on #11413 followups
310 2020-08-11T15:12:34  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11413 | [wallet] [rpc] sendtoaddress/sendmany: Add explicit feerate option by kallewoof · Pull Request #11413 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
311 2020-08-11T15:12:45  <dongcarl> jonatack: do you have link to bip324 discussion?
312 2020-08-11T15:13:23  <jonatack> so will stick with review and p2p refactoring on the side until that's done: we need a universal explicit feerate rpc
313 2020-08-11T15:13:33  <jnewbery> ok, thanks jonatack
314 2020-08-11T15:13:42  <jonatack> dongcarl: yes, will post, that's it for now
315 2020-08-11T15:13:45  <jnewbery> troygiorshev: priorities?
316 2020-08-11T15:13:56  <troygiorshev> two p2p things I've been focusing on
317 2020-08-11T15:14:07  <troygiorshev> big refactor: #19107, moving header verification from net_processing to net.  came out of a PR review club of a jonasschnelli pr.  it's not flashy, but cleaning up this interface will make everything easier going forward.
318 2020-08-11T15:14:10  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19107 | p2p: Move all header verification into the network layer, extend logging by troygiorshev · Pull Request #19107 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
319 2020-08-11T15:14:23  <troygiorshev> feature: #19031 addrv2.  tor v2 deprecation and obsolescence is quickly approaching, addrv2 is needed before we can update to tor v3.
320 2020-08-11T15:14:27  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19031 | Implement ADDRv2 support (part of BIP155) by vasild · Pull Request #19031 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
321 2020-08-11T15:14:36  <jonatack> +1
322 2020-08-11T15:15:02  <jnewbery> ok, thanks troy
323 2020-08-11T15:15:02  <jonatack> 15 sept tor v2 deprecation begins, obsolete next july
324 2020-08-11T15:15:12  <jnewbery> dongcarl: priorities?
325 2020-08-11T15:15:31  <dongcarl> mostly review
326 2020-08-11T15:15:40  <dongcarl> focused on the PRs populating the Peer struct
327 2020-08-11T15:15:55  <dongcarl> also, waiting on Shadow simulator v2 from Tor project
328 2020-08-11T15:16:05  <dongcarl> which I think will be the best way to test our P2P
329 2020-08-11T15:16:12  <dongcarl> Link: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/sponsors/Sponsor38
330 2020-08-11T15:16:17  <dongcarl> that's it!
331 2020-08-11T15:16:23  <jnewbery> (Peer struct is #19607)
332 2020-08-11T15:16:26  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19607 | [p2p] Add Peer struct for per-peer data in net processing by jnewbery · Pull Request #19607 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
333 2020-08-11T15:16:28  <jnewbery> thanks carl!
334 2020-08-11T15:16:36  <jnewbery> ajonas: priorities?
335 2020-08-11T15:17:00  <ajonas> I can wait until we move onto the next topic
336 2020-08-11T15:17:12  <jnewbery> ok
337 2020-08-11T15:17:16  <jnewbery> amiti: priorities?
338 2020-08-11T15:17:28  <amiti> My main focus has been 19316- simplifying how we track different types of connections. Got some reviews yesterday & hopefully its getting close to merge, so planning to address outstanding review comments in a follow up.
339 2020-08-11T15:17:43  <amiti> (ps @dongcarl, @jnewbery if you wanna take another look :))
340 2020-08-11T15:17:49  <amiti> After that I’m excited about #19315 to enable more p2p testing. And I want to make my way back to the rebroadcast work!
341 2020-08-11T15:17:53  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19315 | [tests] Allow outbound & block-relay-only connections in functional tests. by amitiuttarwar · Pull Request #19315 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
342 2020-08-11T15:18:21  <amiti> In terms of review, there’s a lot of PRs I’m excited about and slowly making my way through. Currently reviewing #19670. Also on my list are #17428 (anchors), #19184 (tx logic overhaul). and the per-peer stuff #19509 & #19607 is also interesting
343 2020-08-11T15:18:23  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19670 | Protect localhost and block-relay-only peers from eviction by sdaftuar · Pull Request #19670 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
344 2020-08-11T15:18:28  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17428 | p2p: Try to preserve outbound block-relay-only connections during restart by hebasto · Pull Request #17428 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
345 2020-08-11T15:18:28  <jonatack> dongcarl: https://gist.github.com/jonasschnelli/c530ea8421b8d0e80c51486325587c52
346 2020-08-11T15:18:31  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19184 | Overhaul transaction request logic by sipa · Pull Request #19184 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
347 2020-08-11T15:18:34  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19509 | Per-Peer Message Logging by troygiorshev · Pull Request #19509 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
348 2020-08-11T15:18:38  <jnewbery> I left my ACK on 19316 this morning :)
349 2020-08-11T15:18:39  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19607 | [p2p] Add Peer struct for per-peer data in net processing by jnewbery · Pull Request #19607 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
350 2020-08-11T15:18:55  <amiti> oh I didn't see that yet. awesome thanks!!
351 2020-08-11T15:18:58  <jnewbery> thanks amiti
352 2020-08-11T15:19:18  <jnewbery> fanquake: priorities?
353 2020-08-11T15:19:56  <fanquake> Nothing I am/have been working on is really p2p related. Can probably skip me.
354 2020-08-11T15:20:05  <jnewbery> ok
355 2020-08-11T15:20:10  <jnewbery> pinheadmz: priorities?
356 2020-08-11T15:20:25  <pinheadmz> sorry not much to contribute today
357 2020-08-11T15:20:33  <jnewbery> no problem
358 2020-08-11T15:20:43  <jnewbery> ariard: priorities?
359 2020-08-11T15:21:15  <ariard> yes so AltNet (#18988) is pending on Russ multiprocess
360 2020-08-11T15:21:18  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18988 | RFC: Introducing AltNet, a pluggable framework for alternative transports by ariard · Pull Request #18988 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
361 2020-08-11T15:21:35  <ariard> it would make it far easier to leverage the new multiprocess framework introduced
362 2020-08-11T15:21:55  <ariard> also spend a bit of time evaluating which package relay/RBF pinning flavor would solve pinning
363 2020-08-11T15:22:12  *** frankie1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
364 2020-08-11T15:22:32  <ariard> I'm also interested in tx-relay peer rotation, to improve transaction propagation wrt to pinning/mempool obstruction
365 2020-08-11T15:22:55  *** mrostecki has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
366 2020-08-11T15:23:20  <ariard> I would be glad to get #19645, even if utility is reduced until further mempool/transaction relay policy changes, that's a first step to solve wtxid-pinning issues
367 2020-08-11T15:23:22  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19645 | Allow wtxid-acceptance to the mempool by ariard · Pull Request #19645 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
368 2020-08-11T15:23:45  <ariard> and I'm staying available to review transaction request overhaul/erlay/others
369 2020-08-11T15:23:53  <ariard> that's it
370 2020-08-11T15:24:07  <jnewbery> thanks ariard!
371 2020-08-11T15:24:12  <jnewbery> theStack: priorities?
372 2020-08-11T15:25:06  <jnewbery> elichai2: priorites?
373 2020-08-11T15:25:55  <jnewbery> sipa: priorities?
374 2020-08-11T15:26:13  <jnewbery> (if you missed your turn you can jump in again later)
375 2020-08-11T15:26:37  <sipa> so
376 2020-08-11T15:27:02  <sipa> the next thing on my list is addressing some feedback in 19184 (tx overhaul), and rebasing on top of wtxid relay
377 2020-08-11T15:27:45  <sipa> i'm also interested in helping with bip324 efforts and addrv2, though i haven't found much time for that
378 2020-08-11T15:28:17  <sipa> outbound peer rotation also sounds interesting; i wasn't aware there was recent interest in that
379 2020-08-11T15:29:04  <aj> jnewbery: (priorities?)
380 2020-08-11T15:29:19  <elichai2> I don't work on anything p2p related right now, but I do plan to review a bunch of stuff, so if there'll be a high priority for review out of this it would be great
381 2020-08-11T15:29:32  <jnewbery> we haven't done adiabat and vasild yet, but I can go next
382 2020-08-11T15:29:45  <jnewbery> My short-term focus is on the backports. I've reviewed #19680 and 19681. I've also backported wtxid relay in #19606, which I still think we should backport to v0.20.
383 2020-08-11T15:29:47  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19680 | 0.20: Add txids with non-standard inputs to reject filter by sdaftuar · Pull Request #19680 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
384 2020-08-11T15:29:49  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19606 | Backport wtxid relay to v0.20 by jnewbery · Pull Request #19606 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
385 2020-08-11T15:29:58  <jnewbery> I also have a branch that backports the orphan relay stuff on top of that, which I think makes sense to PR separately, but I can add to v0.20 if that makes it easier for reviewers.
386 2020-08-11T15:30:02  *** b10c has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
387 2020-08-11T15:30:44  <jnewbery> I'd advocate for people to bump reviewing backports up their priority list (both for these backports and in general inBitcoin Core)
388 2020-08-11T15:30:55  <jnewbery> Longer-term, I want to make progress on #19398, where the main goal is to clarify the interface between net and net_processing, while not expanding the scope of cs_main (and then eventually reduce the scope of cs_main by moving data into the new Peer struct).
389 2020-08-11T15:30:56  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19398 | Move remaining application layer data to net processing · Issue #19398 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
390 2020-08-11T15:31:06  <jnewbery> The first PR is #19607. theuni left some review comments last week which I need to respond to.
391 2020-08-11T15:31:08  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19607 | [p2p] Add Peer struct for per-peer data in net processing by jnewbery · Pull Request #19607 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
392 2020-08-11T15:31:16  <jnewbery> that's me
393 2020-08-11T15:31:25  <jnewbery> adiabat: anything you want to add/share?
394 2020-08-11T15:32:00  <jnewbery> vasild: priorities?
395 2020-08-11T15:32:26  <vasild> my priority is to get BIP155 / addrv2 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19031 merged.
396 2020-08-11T15:32:39  <jnewbery> great. Thanks
397 2020-08-11T15:32:45  <jnewbery> Thanks everyone! I hope that topic wasn't too slow. I just wanted to make sure everyone had a chance to share what they're working on/prioritizing.
398 2020-08-11T15:32:57  <jnewbery> we had one other topic suggestion from ajonas
399 2020-08-11T15:33:07  <ajonas> hi
400 2020-08-11T15:33:10  <jnewbery> #topic Opt-in review begging experiment
401 2020-08-11T15:33:30  <vasild> so, I address review suggestions as quickly as possible and rebase it to resolve conflicts. But mostly it is in the hands of reviewers. While waiting on that I am reviewing some randomly picked PRs.
402 2020-08-11T15:33:43  <ajonas> Let me start with the priorities I'm tracking: https://gist.github.com/adamjonas/85137e2623f12450f1978d291a28d680. I think there are some things on there that weren't mentioned or that other people who care about, but weren't here today to mention.
403 2020-08-11T15:34:38  <ajonas> Please ping me if I got something wrong or there are things that you'd like to add
404 2020-08-11T15:34:44  <vasild> maybe I can improve on what I pick to review. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8 is the correct place to pick "important" PRs to review?
405 2020-08-11T15:35:26  <ajonas> Ok. A few months ago, I was reading over https://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/bitcoin-core-dev-tech/2018-03-07-priorities/, which articulates some possibilities for how to better coordinate review. Since then, I've been experimenting with asking for reviews directly. (This was also the motivation of #18949).
406 2020-08-11T15:35:29  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18949 | doc: Add CODEOWNERS file to automatically nominate PR reviewers by adamjonas · Pull Request #18949 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
407 2020-08-11T15:36:03  <ajonas> Right now the sample size and the circle I feel comfortable bothering is small. Here are the results so far: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1INEN1RrZTsu-V4GH6kr0aVhFOVY8nGgx0ajHf3NEYlc/.
408 2020-08-11T15:36:29  <jnewbery> vasild: importance is subjective. Being on that list doesn't necessarily mean that other people think it's important, but everyone is allowed to add one PR to the list, so you can see what each author is prioritizing.
409 2020-08-11T15:36:38  <ajonas> To date, I've cherry picked the PRs that I think I have a chance to help out with so while the numbers look good, there are some notable exceptions where I couldn't move the needle.
410 2020-08-11T15:36:58  <ajonas> And on some of those I just got lucky I think,
411 2020-08-11T15:37:20  <jonatack> ajonas: some of those are merged
412 2020-08-11T15:37:37  <jonatack> e.g. 16756
413 2020-08-11T15:38:06  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
414 2020-08-11T15:38:17  <ajonas> Right. Column J shows the time from PR open to merge
415 2020-08-11T15:38:33  <troygiorshev> ajonas: how did you define "review" in "review to merged (days)".  first ACK, first ACK on the current rebase, when you felt that there was enough review that it was RFM?
416 2020-08-11T15:38:39  <ajonas> Sorry that's column I
417 2020-08-11T15:38:46  <jonatack> ajonas: oic
418 2020-08-11T15:38:46  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
419 2020-08-11T15:38:46  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
420 2020-08-11T15:39:26  <ajonas> yeah, that's misleading troygiorshev. I mean first nag to merge.
421 2020-08-11T15:39:39  <vasild> Yes, importance is subjective. However, it would be convenient to have one place to look for important PRs, even if that place contains different people's lists.
422 2020-08-11T15:39:42  <troygiorshev> ajonas: ah ok
423 2020-08-11T15:39:55  <ajonas> Anyways, if anyone interested in p2p reviewing and would like to opt-in, I'd be interested in expanding my experiment that part of the code.
424 2020-08-11T15:40:00  <jnewbery> I think there are so many other factors, that I
425 2020-08-11T15:40:12  <sdaftuar> ajonas: you mean opt-in to being nagged by you, right?
426 2020-08-11T15:40:16  <jnewbery> 'm not sure the numbers have much meaning
427 2020-08-11T15:40:39  <aj> i had been maintaining https://github.com/users/ajtowns/projects/1 to track p2p/mempool PRs by category things, but hadn't automated it and slacked off this year, it's on my todo to try automating again
428 2020-08-11T15:40:47  <ajonas> sdaftuar: yes
429 2020-08-11T15:41:32  <jnewbery> aj: I found that project board useful to find p2p PRs
430 2020-08-11T15:41:35  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
431 2020-08-11T15:41:48  <ajonas> jnewbery: fair enough. I'm just trying to track the work I've done. Not trying to claim credit for the merges. Just trying to help coordinate.
432 2020-08-11T15:42:25  <jonatack> vasild: i think it's fine to define one's own list of important PRs to review. e.g. longer term for me would be: BIP155/addrv2, BIP324, BIPs340-342, BIP325
433 2020-08-11T15:42:28  <troygiorshev> vasild: I plan on using this meeting log as a "one place to look" :)
434 2020-08-11T15:42:56  <aj> jnewbery: maybe ajonas should opt me in to nags about it then
435 2020-08-11T15:42:58  <jnewbery> ajonas: I understand! I'm just saying that you might not find much signal in the quantative data there
436 2020-08-11T15:43:28  <vasild> ack
437 2020-08-11T15:44:06  <ajonas> That's all I had.
438 2020-08-11T15:44:18  <jnewbery> ajonas: are you asking people to opt-in now or should they message you?
439 2020-08-11T15:44:31  <ajonas> Either works.
440 2020-08-11T15:44:47  <jnewbery> ok, thanks
441 2020-08-11T15:45:11  <sipa> i am open to nagging
442 2020-08-11T15:45:28  <jnewbery> no more proposed topics. Was there anything else anyone wanted to discuss? sdaftuar: it sounded like you might have wanted to go into a bit more detail on some of your priorities?
443 2020-08-11T15:45:33  <sdaftuar> topic suggestion: feature negotiation (new bip proposal from me)
444 2020-08-11T15:45:37  <fanquake> One related comment I'd make is that the "ACK recap" comments can sometimes be misleading. I think there can also be confusion as to why a PR which looks like it has *lots* of ACKs, maybe after a review-club bomb, hasn't been merged.
445 2020-08-11T15:45:39  <ajonas> sipa: great!
446 2020-08-11T15:46:10  <troygiorshev> fanquake: ack recap?
447 2020-08-11T15:46:11  <jnewbery> #topic feature negotiation
448 2020-08-11T15:46:30  <aj> troygiorshev: ajonas sometimes posts a PR comment summarising previous acks
449 2020-08-11T15:46:32  <sdaftuar> i was planning to send this to the mailing list today or tomorrow, so figured this would be a good place to mention it
450 2020-08-11T15:46:34  <sdaftuar> https://github.com/sdaftuar/bips/blob/2020-08-generalized-feature-negotiation/bip-p2p-feature-negotiation.mediawiki
451 2020-08-11T15:46:36  <amiti> fanquake: can you tell me more? I find those ACK recap comments helpful when there's lots of convo on the PR. is there something that can be done to make them more useful?
452 2020-08-11T15:46:44  <troygiorshev> aj: thanks
453 2020-08-11T15:47:02  <sdaftuar> basically wtxid-relay uses a new feature-negotiation method (exchanging messages between version and verack), that would be nice to codify as a method in the future
454 2020-08-11T15:47:20  <jonatack> amiti: +1 i find them useful as well
455 2020-08-11T15:47:29  <sdaftuar> however, i think we need to make sure software on the network knows to ignore unknown messages pre-verack to make this a possibility.  bitcoin core historically has disallowed unknown messages pre-verack
456 2020-08-11T15:47:57  <sdaftuar> so i think it would be nice to get this out there and hopefully make this a standard way we can do things going forward
457 2020-08-11T15:48:02  <sdaftuar>  (end)
458 2020-08-11T15:48:43  <jnewbery> is the idea that each feature has its own p2p message for enabling the feature (like wtxidrelay)?
459 2020-08-11T15:48:55  <sdaftuar> features that need to negotiate at connection startup time.
460 2020-08-11T15:48:56  <ariard> sdaftuar: I think that's good it was unclear between matt and I on bip339 implemn in rust-bitcoin about why 339 bumps both protocol version and wtxid-relay
461 2020-08-11T15:48:57  <troygiorshev> (like addrv2)
462 2020-08-11T15:49:01  <sdaftuar> so many features don't need that, which is fine
463 2020-08-11T15:49:08  <fanquake> amiti: it depends on the PR. Concept ACKs from months ago, after the code has changed significantly are not always relevant. A large amount of ACKs from new/unknown contributors obviously don't hold as much weight  as from contributors with more experience in that part of the code.
464 2020-08-11T15:49:15  <sdaftuar> but the next time we want to negotiate something that is in place before a connection is fully setup, i think this is the best way to do it
465 2020-08-11T15:49:27  <sdaftuar> in particular i'd like to leverage this method for negotiating block-relay only connections
466 2020-08-11T15:49:40  <ajonas> fanquake: I have made an effort to stay away from review club PRs
467 2020-08-11T15:50:08  <fanquake> It's also sometimes unclear what reviewers actually mean when they ACK. i.e if they've just run the functional tests after glancing at the diff on GH, that isn't necessarily meaningful.
468 2020-08-11T15:50:32  <jnewbery> fanquake: can we discuss this next?
469 2020-08-11T15:50:46  <aj> sdaftuar: i thought wtxid message made sense, so making it easily reusable makes sense
470 2020-08-11T15:50:47  <amiti> sdaftuar: I'm a +1 to an explicit message/negotiation for block-relay only connections
471 2020-08-11T15:51:00  <fanquake> jnewbery: sure. don't want to hijack.
472 2020-08-11T15:51:06  <troygiorshev> sdaftuar: concept ACK
473 2020-08-11T15:51:19  <jonatack> troygiorshev: i think vasild's addrv2 implementation can set itself anytime during the connection, not only at handshake
474 2020-08-11T15:51:27  <sdaftuar> one point that occurred to me, is that might update the draft i pasted above to NOT further bump the version number to signal support
475 2020-08-11T15:51:28  <ariard> if I understand well this bip is disentangling protocol version bump from feature negotiation by allowing feature signaling between version/verack
476 2020-08-11T15:51:50  <sdaftuar> because software that chooses to not implement wtxid-relay should already be adopting this proposed bip, basically (if they bump their version number to 70016 or higher at any point)
477 2020-08-11T15:52:06  <sdaftuar> that's a bit in the weeds though for there
478 2020-08-11T15:52:08  <sdaftuar> here*
479 2020-08-11T15:52:10  <jnewbery> I've always thought that extending the version message to include supported and required features would be a good way to negotiate features
480 2020-08-11T15:52:56  <sdaftuar> ariard: yes. more importantly than that is that we're establishing that unknown messages should not cause peer disconnections, which could be problematic for network topology if we get this wrong in the future
481 2020-08-11T15:53:05  <sdaftuar> even if those unknown messages are before VERACK
482 2020-08-11T15:53:11  <troygiorshev> jonatack: right.  I think I remember discussion as to whether that was the right choice though
483 2020-08-11T15:53:40  <sipa> sdaftuar: this all sounds reasonable
484 2020-08-11T15:53:44  <vasild> https://github.com/sdaftuar/bips/blob/2020-08-generalized-feature-negotiation/bip-p2p-feature-negotiation.mediawiki -- something like that came to my mind when doing the BIP155 sendaddrv2 message. Is every new feature going to add its own message sendfoowhatever? Not very nice.
485 2020-08-11T15:53:45  <sdaftuar> wtxid-relay BIP implied that, i'm just now making that more explicit. this would require a change to bitocin core as well
486 2020-08-11T15:54:21  <sdaftuar> vasild: that's basically how we've done every p2p protocol upgrade in the last 4-5 years i think?
487 2020-08-11T15:54:28  <sipa> i find the reliance on protocol versions to enable feature-negotiability a bit ugly still - less so than the earlier feature negotiation through version numbers directly, but still
488 2020-08-11T15:54:28  <sdaftuar> well either that or a service bit i guess
489 2020-08-11T15:54:31  <sdaftuar> but service bits are rare
490 2020-08-11T15:54:32  <troygiorshev> vasild: your point is the motivation for jnewbery's "extended version" iirc
491 2020-08-11T15:54:49  <jnewbery> sdaftuar: do you know whether there are nodes that disconnect on unknown message types? Bitcoin Core just drops them (which I think is the only sensible behaviour)
492 2020-08-11T15:55:14  <sdaftuar> jnewbery: it's been the de facto standard (not documneted anywhere to my knowledge) that unknonw messages after a connection is setup are ignored by software
493 2020-08-11T15:55:23  <vasild> jonatack: troygiorshev: yes, the BIP155 sendaddrv2 can come any time, but we try to do it early so that when the peer is about to advertise his own address to us, he has the option to send us addrv2 - would be important if his address is torv3 because he wouldn't be able to advertise it to us with addr(v1)
494 2020-08-11T15:55:26  <sdaftuar> it has not been the standard, to my knowledge, to allow unknown messages pre-verack
495 2020-08-11T15:55:43  <jnewbery> ah ok. That's the difference
496 2020-08-11T15:55:54  *** sipsorcery has quit IRC
497 2020-08-11T15:57:05  <jnewbery> ok, any final topics?
498 2020-08-11T15:57:37  <jnewbery> that's a wrap then. Thanks everyone
499 2020-08-11T15:57:39  <ariard> sdaftuar: what do you mean by broad agreement? we need this BIP to be widely deployed before using the new feature signaling mechanism ?
500 2020-08-11T15:57:42  <jnewbery> Let me know if you liked the format of this meeting or if you want to change it up for next time.
501 2020-08-11T15:57:42  <aj> sdaftuar: my thinking on big changes priority-wise is: tx relay overhaul up next, then erlay if we can get to it; but package relay is back to the drawing board. happy to think about ...
502 2020-08-11T15:57:57  <troygiorshev> jnewbery: this was great, thanks for organizing it!
503 2020-08-11T15:58:08  <sdaftuar> aj: yeah that's where i'm at as well on that side of things
504 2020-08-11T15:58:11  <aj> sdaftuar: ... some of the topology type stuff, in before erlay i guess?
505 2020-08-11T15:58:17  <sdaftuar> aj: i'm trying to figure out how to squeeze in topology work too
506 2020-08-11T15:58:18  <jonatack> there was an irc discussion on the pre-verack messages here: https://bitcoincore.reviews/18044#l-159
507 2020-08-11T15:58:48  <adiabat> maybe tangential but... any thoughts on port flexibilty
508 2020-08-11T15:58:59  <adiabat> I've gotten servers shut down, and all they do is see that 8333 is open
509 2020-08-11T15:59:25  <sdaftuar> ariard: well, if any software authors brought up concerns about why using unknown messages between version and verack is a problem, then we should factor that in--
510 2020-08-11T15:59:44  <sdaftuar> if some software clients choose to not follow my proposal, that would create implications for us trying to use it down the road
511 2020-08-11T15:59:47  <sdaftuar> as it could partition the network
512 2020-08-11T16:00:06  <sdaftuar> i am not aware of any opposition; i brought this issue up with wtxid-relay and no one commented on it
513 2020-08-11T16:00:20  <jnewbery> #endmeeting
514 2020-08-11T16:00:20  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Tue Aug 11 16:00:20 2020 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
515 2020-08-11T16:00:20  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-08-11-15.00.html
516 2020-08-11T16:00:20  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-08-11-15.00.txt
517 2020-08-11T16:00:20  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-08-11-15.00.log.html
518 2020-08-11T16:00:28  <sdaftuar> but it has to be communicated
519 2020-08-11T16:02:05  <jonatack> fanquake: did you want to expand on the acking question
520 2020-08-11T16:02:23  *** Highway62 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
521 2020-08-11T16:03:11  <aj> adiabat: i think the reason not to do other ports was to prevent bitcoin nodes being used as a primitive botnet that'll start connecting to arbitrary services (or to be mistaken for being part of a botnet if someone spams military.gov's rsh port as a thing to connect to for bitcoin p2p maybe. never been able to judge if that makes much sense these days
522 2020-08-11T16:03:21  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
523 2020-08-11T16:03:47  <instagibbs> adiabat, really
524 2020-08-11T16:04:48  <adiabat> I guess it's tricky; with 8333 it sticks out a lot and is really easy to identify for any one on the network
525 2020-08-11T16:05:04  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
526 2020-08-11T16:05:08  <adiabat> maybe some kind of udp-port knocking or something?  just an idea
527 2020-08-11T16:05:21  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
528 2020-08-11T16:05:37  <fanquake> jonatack: I might write up some thoughts and post them here tomorrow. The gist is that 1 ACK is not always equal to another (obviously). It's not always clear what people mean when they say they've reviewed something. Recapping ACKs from some previous head or a concept ACK from a previous implementation isn't always useful. You can just as easily open a buggy PR, as you can introduce a bug in the last rebase.
529 2020-08-11T16:05:41  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
530 2020-08-11T16:06:31  <ajonas> Some more feedback would be helpful
531 2020-08-11T16:06:32  *** Highway62 has quit IRC
532 2020-08-11T16:06:43  <troygiorshev> >it's not always clear ...
533 2020-08-11T16:06:47  <troygiorshev> that's the issue, no?
534 2020-08-11T16:06:58  <fanquake> It's not uncommon for a PR to have a few ACKs, and then an experienced contributor to turn up and start pointing out bugs. There's also no rush to merge things.
535 2020-08-11T16:08:06  <ajonas> Understood. You don't have to do it now, but maybe we can talk about some of the ones that really stood out as unhelpful.
536 2020-08-11T16:08:07  <fanquake> troygiorshev: sure; and comments like "I ran the functional tests" generally aren't useful unless you did it one some exotic machine/setup etc. In which case, you should point it out!
537 2020-08-11T16:08:24  <fanquake> Obviously not referring to personally here.
538 2020-08-11T16:08:49  <troygiorshev> didn't take it personally :)
539 2020-08-11T16:09:50  <troygiorshev> certainly is difficult (i imagine) to distinguish between "this is a really clean PR and I really have no comments on it, it's RFM" and "I've done my best but I'm not familiar enough with bitcoin to really review this"
540 2020-08-11T16:10:25  <jonatack> fanquake: agreed. contributing.md clearly states that all review is not equal. providing ack methodology is also pretty much inversely valuable to review experience, e.g. newer reviewers providing details on what they did and thought about and checked is probably more useful than if i more or less repeat the same process info  on each review ack
541 2020-08-11T16:10:42  <aj> troygiorshev: always seems best to qualify your ack if it's the latter
542 2020-08-11T16:11:11  <sipa> yes, you are in no way restricted to just the word "ack" when leaving a review :)
543 2020-08-11T16:11:34  <sipa> a one-line summary of what you did, or how qualified you feel about it, is very useful
544 2020-08-11T16:12:03  <amiti> fanquake: ofc ACK review comments can't replace the job of the maintainer to make those more subtle judgments, but the reason I find them helpful is to maintain momentum on PRs with lots of comments. and give me (and other reviewers) a quick overview as a starting point. whether I already reviewed the PR or am just starting a review
545 2020-08-11T16:13:14  <amiti> sipa: earlier you referred to a mention of outbound eviction, what was that in regards to?
546 2020-08-11T16:13:51  <sipa> 08:07:11 < sdaftuar> more improvements to syncing our tips with more peers (possibly including tx-relay-peer rotation, which can help here as well)
547 2020-08-11T16:14:17  <sipa> and apparently i misread; jonatack was talking about inbound eviction policy
548 2020-08-11T16:15:08  <amiti> ah okay, thanks
549 2020-08-11T16:15:54  <jonatack> i was specifically trying to observe and figure out how to test https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19500
550 2020-08-11T16:16:38  <jonatack> which made me realise that i didn't know what was going on with my peer conns in enough detail
551 2020-08-11T16:17:42  <jonatack> i'm running bitcoin locally with nLastBlockTime and nLastTXTime added to getpeerinfo for my peer connections dashboard
552 2020-08-11T16:18:27  <jonatack> sipa: is there a good reason why that (eviction criteria) data is not exposed through getpeerinfo currently?
553 2020-08-11T16:18:59  <sipa> jonatack: nope; i suspect just nobody ever added it
554 2020-08-11T16:19:05  <phantomcircuit> adiabat, it has to be easy to identify a bitcoin node that's listening, and it's inherently going to be easy to identify a bitcoin node based on the network traffic
555 2020-08-11T16:19:13  <jonatack> e.g. timestamp of last block and last txn for that peer
556 2020-08-11T16:19:33  <phantomcircuit> without significantly delaying block relay, it's impossible to hide that you're running a bitcoin node from the network operator
557 2020-08-11T16:19:40  <adiabat> phantomcircuit: right I guess this would only make sense in the context of bip 324 or similar
558 2020-08-11T16:19:41  <jonatack> sipa: thanks. will propose.
559 2020-08-11T16:19:49  *** vincenzopalazzo has quit IRC
560 2020-08-11T16:20:08  <phantomcircuit> adiabat, no even then you can trivially detect that it's a bitcoin node
561 2020-08-11T16:20:17  <jonatack> it looks like this ATM: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19643#issuecomment-671093420
562 2020-08-11T16:20:45  <phantomcircuit> just observe the traffic patterns, if you consistently see a spike in bandwidth after a block is found, then it's a bitcoin node
563 2020-08-11T16:21:09  <sipa> phantomcircuit: probably less the case now with compact blocks
564 2020-08-11T16:21:19  <sipa> i'm sure traffic analysis is still possible
565 2020-08-11T16:21:29  <sipa> but it may be more subtle
566 2020-08-11T16:21:38  <sipa> if you don't want false positives
567 2020-08-11T16:21:54  <phantomcircuit> sipa, it's still going to be super obvious over time
568 2020-08-11T16:22:32  <adiabat> phantomcircuit: I agree that if you want to find out you can, but it gets a lot harder
569 2020-08-11T16:23:05  <phantomcircuit> if you're listening it's always going to be trivial
570 2020-08-11T16:23:06  <adiabat> it's not going to stop the NSA or whoever, but may well stop ISPs who just have something that looks for 8333 and blocks that port
571 2020-08-11T16:23:51  <adiabat> or scripts that shut down servers or flag that port as meaning a host is compromised
572 2020-08-11T16:25:46  <adiabat> we got free google cloud credits to run some bitcoin tests / research, and they kept shutting our VPSs down
573 2020-08-11T16:26:04  <adiabat> even though we were like, yeah this is the research you gave us the free credits to do...
574 2020-08-11T16:29:04  *** sipsorcery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
575 2020-08-11T16:38:04  *** watersnake1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
576 2020-08-11T16:51:51  *** jeremyrubin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
577 2020-08-11T17:10:01  *** lightlike has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
578 2020-08-11T17:12:29  *** baldur has quit IRC
579 2020-08-11T17:13:05  *** theStack has quit IRC
580 2020-08-11T17:16:47  <jnewbery> if any maintainers are around, I think #19316 is RFM. ACKs on latest commit from laanwj, sdaftuar, jnewbery and vasild
581 2020-08-11T17:16:50  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19316 | [net] Cleanup logic around connection types by amitiuttarwar · Pull Request #19316 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
582 2020-08-11T17:24:50  *** baldur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
583 2020-08-11T17:30:00  *** morcos has quit IRC
584 2020-08-11T17:31:36  *** b10c has quit IRC
585 2020-08-11T17:34:30  *** sipsorcery has quit IRC
586 2020-08-11T17:37:43  *** sipsorcery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
587 2020-08-11T17:39:46  *** morcos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
588 2020-08-11T17:51:31  *** mdunnio has quit IRC
589 2020-08-11T17:51:45  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
590 2020-08-11T17:51:45  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] gzhao408 opened pull request #19698: test: apply strict verification flags for transaction tests and assert backwards compatibility (master...test-verify-flags) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19698
591 2020-08-11T17:51:55  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
592 2020-08-11T17:52:09  *** shesek has quit IRC
593 2020-08-11T17:54:12  *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
594 2020-08-11T18:00:02  *** frankie1 has quit IRC
595 2020-08-11T18:02:40  <achow101> review beg for #18654. Has 2 acks, would be nice to have it merged soon
596 2020-08-11T18:02:43  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18654 | rpc: separate bumpfees psbt creation function into psbtbumpfee by achow101 · Pull Request #18654 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
597 2020-08-11T18:04:54  *** gzhao408 has quit IRC
598 2020-08-11T18:16:04  *** jarthur_ is now known as jarthur
599 2020-08-11T18:21:53  *** davidfetter1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
600 2020-08-11T18:29:38  *** DeanWeen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
601 2020-08-11T18:32:47  *** TallTim has quit IRC
602 2020-08-11T18:38:02  *** Pavlenex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
603 2020-08-11T18:46:08  *** owowo has quit IRC
604 2020-08-11T18:50:34  *** Pavlenex has quit IRC
605 2020-08-11T18:50:54  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
606 2020-08-11T18:52:15  *** vincenzopalazzo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
607 2020-08-11T18:54:06  *** greypw has quit IRC
608 2020-08-11T18:54:13  *** BGL has quit IRC
609 2020-08-11T18:55:15  *** greypw has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
610 2020-08-11T18:59:05  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
611 2020-08-11T18:59:35  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
612 2020-08-11T19:13:59  *** ghost43_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
613 2020-08-11T19:14:43  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
614 2020-08-11T19:27:38  <nehan> quick comment on the review nagging stuff from the p2p meeting: i think there is an implicit assumption in there that faster merges are better (by measuring time to merge and suggesting to optimize on it). i don't agree with that and want to point out it might not be great to encourage faster merges. i'd argue a better metric is quantity of high-quality review.
615 2020-08-11T19:35:59  *** TallTim has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
616 2020-08-11T19:39:04  *** Davterra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
617 2020-08-11T19:53:28  *** mrostecki has quit IRC
618 2020-08-11T20:00:39  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
619 2020-08-11T20:01:06  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
620 2020-08-11T20:13:36  *** Talkless has quit IRC
621 2020-08-11T20:15:12  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
622 2020-08-11T20:20:10  *** troygior1hev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
623 2020-08-11T20:22:25  *** PaulTroo_ has quit IRC
624 2020-08-11T20:22:26  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
625 2020-08-11T20:23:23  *** troygiorshev has quit IRC
626 2020-08-11T20:26:21  *** PaulTroo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
627 2020-08-11T20:27:20  *** BGL has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
628 2020-08-11T20:34:07  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
629 2020-08-11T20:50:43  *** Guyver2_ has quit IRC
630 2020-08-11T20:54:20  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
631 2020-08-11T21:00:02  *** davidfetter1 has quit IRC
632 2020-08-11T21:06:26  <sdaftuar> nehan: i think that's a fair point, but for a given amount of review from a given set of reviewers, the quality of that review is likely higher when not excessively drawn out over time. i think this is because people are more thoughtful in responding to other good review comments if their own thinking on how a PR works is fresh in their minds, and because errors can crop up due to rebases as the
633 2020-08-11T21:06:27  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
634 2020-08-11T21:06:28  <sdaftuar> underlying code base changes while a PR is open
635 2020-08-11T21:07:13  <sdaftuar> so maybe it's not reasonable to expect merges to happen in very short periods of time and have that be a good thing... but 6-12 month review cycles strikes me as usually not very good outcomes for a PR
636 2020-08-11T21:11:07  *** PaulTro__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
637 2020-08-11T21:13:33  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
638 2020-08-11T21:13:52  *** shesek has quit IRC
639 2020-08-11T21:13:52  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
640 2020-08-11T21:14:35  *** PaulTroo_ has quit IRC
641 2020-08-11T21:21:06  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
642 2020-08-11T21:21:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theStack closed pull request #18940: miner: fix off-by-ones in BlockAssembler::TestPackage (master...20200511-miner-fix-off-by-one-in-test-package) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18940
643 2020-08-11T21:21:07  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
644 2020-08-11T21:31:48  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
645 2020-08-11T21:37:06  *** promag has quit IRC
646 2020-08-11T21:38:30  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
647 2020-08-11T21:55:55  *** kwm1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
648 2020-08-11T21:58:46  *** Davterra has quit IRC
649 2020-08-11T22:05:23  *** achow101 has quit IRC
650 2020-08-11T22:06:41  *** achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
651 2020-08-11T22:08:00  *** marcoagner has quit IRC
652 2020-08-11T22:14:21  *** lightlike has quit IRC
653 2020-08-11T22:15:35  *** darosior has quit IRC
654 2020-08-11T22:17:01  *** fox2p has quit IRC
655 2020-08-11T22:19:03  *** fox2p has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
656 2020-08-11T22:25:22  *** sipsorcery has quit IRC
657 2020-08-11T22:28:07  *** darosior has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
658 2020-08-11T22:29:23  *** mdunnio has quit IRC
659 2020-08-11T22:32:34  *** darosior has quit IRC
660 2020-08-11T22:39:08  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
661 2020-08-11T22:53:17  <ajonas> nehan: Point well taken. To build on what sdaftuar mentioned, I've seen evidence that some are discouraged by month+ gaps in a review cycle or don't feel comfortable asking for review themselves. Each PR is different -- different complexity, different set of reviewers, etc. I don't think any apples to apples comparison on an individual PR basis makes sense.
662 2020-08-11T22:53:40  <ajonas> In aggregate, however, I think there is the possibility of seeing some signal in those numbers by coordinating reviews or a designated entity to do the nagging. The goal is to allow authors to focus more on their contributions rather than rebasing. Time to merge is a first bad metric that I thought might be a decent proxy, but I'd certainly be open to other ways to measure progress.
663 2020-08-11T22:59:03  *** vasild has quit IRC
664 2020-08-11T23:00:31  *** vasild has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
665 2020-08-11T23:04:05  *** diogorsergio has quit IRC
666 2020-08-11T23:10:05  *** darosior has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
667 2020-08-11T23:16:00  *** sipsorcery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
668 2020-08-11T23:39:06  *** promag has quit IRC
669 2020-08-11T23:39:48  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
670 2020-08-11T23:41:17  *** darosior has quit IRC
671 2020-08-11T23:42:35  *** darosior has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
672 2020-08-11T23:42:35  *** darosior has quit IRC
673 2020-08-11T23:42:49  *** darosior has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
674 2020-08-11T23:52:25  *** sipsorcery has quit IRC
675 2020-08-11T23:58:05  *** promag has quit IRC
676 2020-08-11T23:59:16  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev