1 2020-09-17T00:00:02  *** Suntop1 has quit IRC
  2 2020-09-17T00:01:06  *** jaybny has quit IRC
  3 2020-09-17T00:02:18  *** jaybny has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  4 2020-09-17T00:03:01  *** melande1 has quit IRC
  5 2020-09-17T00:03:10  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
  6 2020-09-17T00:03:24  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  7 2020-09-17T00:13:06  *** jaybny has quit IRC
  8 2020-09-17T00:20:07  *** melande1 has quit IRC
  9 2020-09-17T00:20:24  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 10 2020-09-17T00:21:07  *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 11 2020-09-17T00:22:11  *** ironmarx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 12 2020-09-17T00:26:04  *** mdunnio has quit IRC
 13 2020-09-17T00:27:33  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 14 2020-09-17T00:34:14  *** vasild has quit IRC
 15 2020-09-17T00:34:25  *** vasild has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 16 2020-09-17T00:38:53  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 17 2020-09-17T00:44:24  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 18 2020-09-17T00:47:35  *** mrostecki has quit IRC
 19 2020-09-17T00:55:41  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 20 2020-09-17T00:55:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] eltociear opened pull request #19965: Fix GitHub format (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19965
 21 2020-09-17T00:55:42  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 22 2020-09-17T00:57:11  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 23 2020-09-17T00:57:11  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #19965: Fix GitHub format (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19965
 24 2020-09-17T00:57:12  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 25 2020-09-17T00:59:44  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 26 2020-09-17T01:01:13  *** Emcy_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 27 2020-09-17T01:01:54  *** Emcy has quit IRC
 28 2020-09-17T01:01:58  *** Emcy_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 29 2020-09-17T01:03:07  *** S3RK has quit IRC
 30 2020-09-17T01:03:13  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 31 2020-09-17T01:07:04  *** melande1 has quit IRC
 32 2020-09-17T01:07:30  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 33 2020-09-17T01:11:42  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 34 2020-09-17T01:15:22  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 35 2020-09-17T01:21:00  *** melande1 has quit IRC
 36 2020-09-17T01:21:03  *** sdaftuar_ has quit IRC
 37 2020-09-17T01:21:22  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 38 2020-09-17T01:22:49  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 39 2020-09-17T01:23:00  *** Emcy_ has quit IRC
 40 2020-09-17T01:23:24  *** sdaftuar_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 41 2020-09-17T01:41:26  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
 42 2020-09-17T01:45:19  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 43 2020-09-17T01:53:21  *** Emcy_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 44 2020-09-17T01:54:03  *** Emcy has quit IRC
 45 2020-09-17T02:16:03  *** higherorderbit has quit IRC
 46 2020-09-17T02:18:03  *** melande1 has quit IRC
 47 2020-09-17T02:18:23  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 48 2020-09-17T02:19:07  *** melande1 has quit IRC
 49 2020-09-17T02:19:28  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 50 2020-09-17T02:21:52  *** higherorderbit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 51 2020-09-17T02:21:57  *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 52 2020-09-17T02:27:02  *** mdunnio has quit IRC
 53 2020-09-17T02:48:39  *** davec has quit IRC
 54 2020-09-17T02:54:51  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 55 2020-09-17T03:00:01  *** ironmarx has quit IRC
 56 2020-09-17T03:01:07  *** arowser has quit IRC
 57 2020-09-17T03:01:27  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 58 2020-09-17T03:19:00  *** melande1 has quit IRC
 59 2020-09-17T03:19:22  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 60 2020-09-17T03:20:53  *** melande1 has quit IRC
 61 2020-09-17T03:21:15  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 62 2020-09-17T03:22:08  *** blackjid has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 63 2020-09-17T03:29:23  *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 64 2020-09-17T03:35:14  *** sky54521 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 65 2020-09-17T03:37:42  <sky54521> People so less
 66 2020-09-17T03:37:51  *** worc3131 has quit IRC
 67 2020-09-17T03:38:25  <sky54521> Does anyone online
 68 2020-09-17T03:39:10  *** mdunnio has quit IRC
 69 2020-09-17T03:39:16  <kallewoof> #proposedmeetingtopic how should signet params be prefixed? currently "signet_<..>" e.g. "signet_challenge"
 70 2020-09-17T03:42:23  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 71 2020-09-17T03:45:11  *** sky54521 has quit IRC
 72 2020-09-17T03:45:46  *** sky54521 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 73 2020-09-17T03:47:01  *** S3RK has quit IRC
 74 2020-09-17T03:47:30  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 75 2020-09-17T03:53:02  *** melande1 has quit IRC
 76 2020-09-17T03:54:15  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 77 2020-09-17T03:55:24  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has quit IRC
 78 2020-09-17T04:01:07  *** arowser has quit IRC
 79 2020-09-17T04:01:25  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 80 2020-09-17T04:10:49  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 81 2020-09-17T04:11:04  *** melande1 has quit IRC
 82 2020-09-17T04:11:27  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 83 2020-09-17T04:15:13  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 84 2020-09-17T04:20:57  *** sky54521 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 85 2020-09-17T04:21:30  *** sky54521 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 86 2020-09-17T04:25:05  *** melande1 has quit IRC
 87 2020-09-17T04:25:30  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 88 2020-09-17T04:27:02  *** sky54521 has quit IRC
 89 2020-09-17T04:28:30  *** sky54521 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 90 2020-09-17T04:29:48  *** kristapsk___ has quit IRC
 91 2020-09-17T04:44:05  *** arowser has quit IRC
 92 2020-09-17T04:44:23  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 93 2020-09-17T04:45:22  *** cato_ has quit IRC
 94 2020-09-17T04:45:24  *** morcos has quit IRC
 95 2020-09-17T04:45:24  *** davterra has quit IRC
 96 2020-09-17T04:45:28  *** cato__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 97 2020-09-17T04:45:40  *** morcos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 98 2020-09-17T04:45:56  *** davterra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 99 2020-09-17T04:46:05  *** arowser has quit IRC
100 2020-09-17T04:46:22  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
101 2020-09-17T04:51:07  *** arowser has quit IRC
102 2020-09-17T04:51:24  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
103 2020-09-17T04:52:04  *** DeanWeen has quit IRC
104 2020-09-17T04:53:47  *** DeanWeen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
105 2020-09-17T04:58:06  *** arowser has quit IRC
106 2020-09-17T04:58:25  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
107 2020-09-17T04:59:46  *** S3RK has quit IRC
108 2020-09-17T04:59:53  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
109 2020-09-17T05:05:05  *** baldur has quit IRC
110 2020-09-17T05:06:01  *** melande1 has quit IRC
111 2020-09-17T05:06:27  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
112 2020-09-17T05:17:54  *** baldur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
113 2020-09-17T05:19:54  *** go11111111111 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
114 2020-09-17T05:20:51  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
115 2020-09-17T05:22:20  *** go121212 has quit IRC
116 2020-09-17T05:24:06  *** arowser has quit IRC
117 2020-09-17T05:24:26  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
118 2020-09-17T05:25:05  *** arowser has quit IRC
119 2020-09-17T05:25:22  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
120 2020-09-17T05:28:04  *** melande1 has quit IRC
121 2020-09-17T05:28:23  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122 2020-09-17T05:29:25  *** sky54521 has quit IRC
123 2020-09-17T05:34:19  *** MrPaz has quit IRC
124 2020-09-17T05:35:56  *** Kiminuo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
125 2020-09-17T05:45:00  *** S3RK has quit IRC
126 2020-09-17T05:45:27  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
127 2020-09-17T05:46:40  *** S3RK has quit IRC
128 2020-09-17T05:46:48  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
129 2020-09-17T05:47:03  *** ctrlbreak_MAD has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
130 2020-09-17T05:47:03  *** S3RK has quit IRC
131 2020-09-17T05:47:30  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
132 2020-09-17T05:50:29  *** ctrlbreak has quit IRC
133 2020-09-17T05:55:27  *** blackjid has quit IRC
134 2020-09-17T06:00:01  *** cltrbreak_MAD2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
135 2020-09-17T06:01:00  *** melande1 has quit IRC
136 2020-09-17T06:01:22  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
137 2020-09-17T06:03:31  *** ctrlbreak_MAD has quit IRC
138 2020-09-17T06:12:07  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
139 2020-09-17T06:14:00  *** melande1 has quit IRC
140 2020-09-17T06:14:30  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
141 2020-09-17T06:17:24  *** tralfaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
142 2020-09-17T06:18:07  *** davterra has quit IRC
143 2020-09-17T06:22:24  *** bcremer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
144 2020-09-17T06:30:08  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
145 2020-09-17T06:37:28  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
146 2020-09-17T06:44:35  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
147 2020-09-17T06:47:07  *** arowser has quit IRC
148 2020-09-17T06:47:25  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
149 2020-09-17T06:52:39  *** andreacab has quit IRC
150 2020-09-17T07:03:12  <jonatack> kallewoof: i suppose signetchallenge, as that's how all the others are (except reindex-chainstate that uses lispy kebab-case)
151 2020-09-17T07:05:02  *** melande1 has quit IRC
152 2020-09-17T07:05:24  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
153 2020-09-17T07:05:51  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has quit IRC
154 2020-09-17T07:06:05  *** melande1 has quit IRC
155 2020-09-17T07:06:28  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
156 2020-09-17T07:09:35  *** marcoagner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
157 2020-09-17T07:12:46  *** jonatack has quit IRC
158 2020-09-17T07:17:35  <gleb> What's the real expectation between blocksonly-mode/block-relay-only-conns and RELAY permission? If a blocksonly-node assignes the permission to a peer, this peer *is allowed* to relay transactions (we won't disconnect them like we do without permission). However, in practice, they would never do, because blocksonly-node tells them not to
159 2020-09-17T07:17:35  <gleb> (fRelay=false in the VERSION message).
160 2020-09-17T07:17:54  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
161 2020-09-17T07:18:42  *** S3RK has quit IRC
162 2020-09-17T07:18:50  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
163 2020-09-17T07:22:47  *** bcremer has quit IRC
164 2020-09-17T07:24:16  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
165 2020-09-17T07:24:16  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ajtowns closed pull request #15502: p2p: Speed up initial connection to p2p network (master...201902-trytoavoiddns) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15502
166 2020-09-17T07:24:17  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
167 2020-09-17T07:28:11  *** sky54521 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
168 2020-09-17T07:28:51  *** go121212 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
169 2020-09-17T07:31:40  *** go11111111111 has quit IRC
170 2020-09-17T07:34:24  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
171 2020-09-17T07:51:14  *** andreacab has quit IRC
172 2020-09-17T07:51:20  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
173 2020-09-17T07:59:25  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
174 2020-09-17T07:59:25  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] robot-dreams opened pull request #19967: test: Replace (dis)?connect_nodes globals with TestFramework methods (master...connect-nodes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19967
175 2020-09-17T07:59:26  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
176 2020-09-17T08:02:33  *** AstroDroid has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
177 2020-09-17T08:02:44  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
178 2020-09-17T08:03:01  *** melande1 has quit IRC
179 2020-09-17T08:03:23  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
180 2020-09-17T08:16:02  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
181 2020-09-17T08:20:32  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
182 2020-09-17T08:20:49  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
183 2020-09-17T08:21:23  *** jonatack has quit IRC
184 2020-09-17T08:22:15  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
185 2020-09-17T08:29:44  *** andreacab has quit IRC
186 2020-09-17T08:30:01  *** melande1 has quit IRC
187 2020-09-17T08:30:10  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
188 2020-09-17T08:30:25  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
189 2020-09-17T08:33:52  *** sethrogers23[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
190 2020-09-17T08:34:30  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
191 2020-09-17T08:34:53  *** andreacab has quit IRC
192 2020-09-17T08:51:38  *** nullptr| has quit IRC
193 2020-09-17T08:54:29  *** S3RK has quit IRC
194 2020-09-17T08:54:56  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
195 2020-09-17T08:58:39  *** nullptr| has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
196 2020-09-17T09:00:02  *** AstroDroid has quit IRC
197 2020-09-17T09:00:47  *** bosch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
198 2020-09-17T09:04:05  *** arowser has quit IRC
199 2020-09-17T09:04:25  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
200 2020-09-17T09:05:17  *** kexkey has quit IRC
201 2020-09-17T09:07:34  *** S3RK has quit IRC
202 2020-09-17T09:07:45  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
203 2020-09-17T09:07:49  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
204 2020-09-17T09:09:04  *** melande1 has quit IRC
205 2020-09-17T09:09:24  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
206 2020-09-17T09:17:05  *** arowser has quit IRC
207 2020-09-17T09:17:24  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
208 2020-09-17T09:21:07  *** arowser has quit IRC
209 2020-09-17T09:21:24  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
210 2020-09-17T09:22:17  *** blardo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
211 2020-09-17T09:23:00  *** melande1 has quit IRC
212 2020-09-17T09:23:24  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
213 2020-09-17T09:25:01  *** promag has quit IRC
214 2020-09-17T09:29:31  *** mrostecki has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
215 2020-09-17T09:30:59  *** andreacab has quit IRC
216 2020-09-17T09:31:25  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
217 2020-09-17T09:36:19  *** andreacab has quit IRC
218 2020-09-17T09:47:56  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has quit IRC
219 2020-09-17T09:50:03  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
220 2020-09-17T09:50:50  *** dom0 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
221 2020-09-17T09:54:26  *** shaunsun has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
222 2020-09-17T09:59:03  *** shaunsun has quit IRC
223 2020-09-17T10:04:27  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
224 2020-09-17T10:06:00  *** melande1 has quit IRC
225 2020-09-17T10:06:25  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
226 2020-09-17T10:08:04  *** melande1 has quit IRC
227 2020-09-17T10:08:25  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
228 2020-09-17T10:10:03  *** vasild has quit IRC
229 2020-09-17T10:10:15  *** cato_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
230 2020-09-17T10:11:07  *** cato__ has quit IRC
231 2020-09-17T10:12:16  *** vasild has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
232 2020-09-17T10:14:22  *** S3RK has quit IRC
233 2020-09-17T10:14:32  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
234 2020-09-17T10:15:17  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
235 2020-09-17T10:18:27  *** Earnest18Hilll has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
236 2020-09-17T10:34:50  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
237 2020-09-17T10:34:50  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] robot-dreams opened pull request #19968: doc: make it easier to work out size of bloom filter (master...bloom-doc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19968
238 2020-09-17T10:34:51  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
239 2020-09-17T10:35:31  *** jonatack has quit IRC
240 2020-09-17T10:43:06  *** arowser has quit IRC
241 2020-09-17T10:43:25  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
242 2020-09-17T11:05:05  *** Earnest18Hilll has quit IRC
243 2020-09-17T11:06:00  *** melande1 has quit IRC
244 2020-09-17T11:06:23  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
245 2020-09-17T11:15:06  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
246 2020-09-17T11:15:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] robot-dreams closed pull request #19967: test: Replace (dis)?connect_nodes globals with TestFramework methods (master...connect-nodes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19967
247 2020-09-17T11:15:07  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
248 2020-09-17T11:15:36  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
249 2020-09-17T11:15:36  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] robot-dreams reopened pull request #19967: test: Replace (dis)?connect_nodes globals with TestFramework methods (master...connect-nodes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19967
250 2020-09-17T11:15:37  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
251 2020-09-17T11:16:01  *** melande1 has quit IRC
252 2020-09-17T11:16:25  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
253 2020-09-17T11:19:57  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
254 2020-09-17T11:25:53  *** S3RK has quit IRC
255 2020-09-17T11:43:23  *** MrPaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
256 2020-09-17T11:51:27  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
257 2020-09-17T11:54:33  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
258 2020-09-17T11:57:07  *** davterra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
259 2020-09-17T11:57:43  *** tralfaz has quit IRC
260 2020-09-17T12:00:01  *** blardo has quit IRC
261 2020-09-17T12:10:01  *** melande1 has quit IRC
262 2020-09-17T12:10:24  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
263 2020-09-17T12:11:14  <sdaftuar_> gleb: if A sends B a version message where frelaytxes=false, that means that B should not announce transactions to A
264 2020-09-17T12:11:20  <sdaftuar_> it does not mean that A will not announce transactions to B
265 2020-09-17T12:11:27  *** sdaftuar_ is now known as sdaftuar
266 2020-09-17T12:12:29  <sdaftuar> the reason that is in the protocol is to support light-clients that might need a window of time to send over a bloom filter to B, to avoid their bandwidth being flooded in between sending a version and sending the filter
267 2020-09-17T12:12:32  <sdaftuar> (i believe)
268 2020-09-17T12:13:14  <sdaftuar> we piggy-backed off that functionality being present when -blocksonly mode was added
269 2020-09-17T12:13:21  <sdaftuar> and then again when block-relay-only peers were added
270 2020-09-17T12:18:26  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
271 2020-09-17T12:21:47  *** promag has quit IRC
272 2020-09-17T12:21:50  <gleb> sdaftuar: That's a different thing, I'm talking about sending txs from B->A. It should not announce transactions, and we will disconnect if they do. Except the case if we re-allow it with RELAY permission
273 2020-09-17T12:22:00  *** melande1 has quit IRC
274 2020-09-17T12:22:03  *** Jayflux has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
275 2020-09-17T12:22:27  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
276 2020-09-17T12:22:37  <gleb> Then it's allowed to send transactions B->A and A will process them just fine.
277 2020-09-17T12:23:11  <gleb> But node B running Bitcoin Core currently doesn't employ this ability, because it doesn't know it's permitted.
278 2020-09-17T12:31:00  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
279 2020-09-17T12:37:38  *** bosch has quit IRC
280 2020-09-17T12:39:35  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
281 2020-09-17T12:44:31  *** twistedline__ has quit IRC
282 2020-09-17T12:44:53  *** twistedline__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
283 2020-09-17T12:44:57  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
284 2020-09-17T12:49:04  <sdaftuar> gleb: ah i see
285 2020-09-17T12:49:26  <sdaftuar> so in general B has no way of knowing that A has given it those permissions
286 2020-09-17T12:49:48  *** S3RK has quit IRC
287 2020-09-17T12:51:20  <sdaftuar> hmm.  what happens if you connect to a node that is running in blocksonly mode?
288 2020-09-17T12:59:45  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
289 2020-09-17T13:04:20  *** promag has quit IRC
290 2020-09-17T13:05:01  *** melande1 has quit IRC
291 2020-09-17T13:05:25  *** melande1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
292 2020-09-17T13:07:08  *** arowser has quit IRC
293 2020-09-17T13:07:26  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
294 2020-09-17T13:08:07  *** arowser has quit IRC
295 2020-09-17T13:08:25  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
296 2020-09-17T13:09:10  *** arowser has quit IRC
297 2020-09-17T13:09:28  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
298 2020-09-17T13:09:45  *** Jayflux has quit IRC
299 2020-09-17T13:10:08  *** arowser has quit IRC
300 2020-09-17T13:10:27  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
301 2020-09-17T13:12:08  *** arowser has quit IRC
302 2020-09-17T13:12:27  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
303 2020-09-17T13:12:42  *** melande1 has quit IRC
304 2020-09-17T13:13:07  *** arowser has quit IRC
305 2020-09-17T13:13:25  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
306 2020-09-17T13:16:08  *** arowser has quit IRC
307 2020-09-17T13:16:26  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
308 2020-09-17T13:17:08  *** arowser has quit IRC
309 2020-09-17T13:17:26  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
310 2020-09-17T13:18:08  *** arowser has quit IRC
311 2020-09-17T13:18:27  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312 2020-09-17T13:19:14  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
313 2020-09-17T13:20:21  *** jonatack has quit IRC
314 2020-09-17T13:21:40  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
315 2020-09-17T13:22:17  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
316 2020-09-17T13:23:03  *** Kiminuo has quit IRC
317 2020-09-17T13:28:51  *** andreacab has quit IRC
318 2020-09-17T13:29:16  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
319 2020-09-17T13:30:58  *** MaddinSM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
320 2020-09-17T13:31:31  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
321 2020-09-17T13:31:31  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Sjors opened pull request #19969: Send RPC touch-ups (master...2020/09/send_touchups) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19969
322 2020-09-17T13:31:32  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
323 2020-09-17T13:33:49  *** andreacab has quit IRC
324 2020-09-17T13:38:05  *** arowser has quit IRC
325 2020-09-17T13:38:25  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
326 2020-09-17T13:55:41  *** kexkey has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
327 2020-09-17T14:00:39  *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
328 2020-09-17T14:02:36  *** promag has quit IRC
329 2020-09-17T14:05:58  *** mdunnio has quit IRC
330 2020-09-17T14:06:10  *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
331 2020-09-17T14:22:34  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
332 2020-09-17T14:22:34  *** jonatack has quit IRC
333 2020-09-17T14:27:46  <gleb> sdaftuar: I don't think there's any difference?
334 2020-09-17T14:32:32  *** TheRec has quit IRC
335 2020-09-17T14:37:45  *** andreacab has quit IRC
336 2020-09-17T14:38:11  *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
337 2020-09-17T14:39:26  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
338 2020-09-17T14:41:06  *** Talkless has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
339 2020-09-17T14:42:21  *** andreacab has quit IRC
340 2020-09-17T14:43:44  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has quit IRC
341 2020-09-17T14:44:14  *** promag has quit IRC
342 2020-09-17T15:00:01  *** MaddinSM has quit IRC
343 2020-09-17T15:00:06  *** arowser has quit IRC
344 2020-09-17T15:00:26  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
345 2020-09-17T15:02:06  *** arowser has quit IRC
346 2020-09-17T15:02:24  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
347 2020-09-17T15:06:31  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
348 2020-09-17T15:07:05  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
349 2020-09-17T15:15:28  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
350 2020-09-17T15:20:03  *** promag has quit IRC
351 2020-09-17T15:20:10  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
352 2020-09-17T15:22:11  *** jMCg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
353 2020-09-17T15:24:03  *** TheRec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
354 2020-09-17T15:24:03  *** TheRec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
355 2020-09-17T15:24:46  *** S3RK has quit IRC
356 2020-09-17T15:30:26  *** TheRec_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
357 2020-09-17T15:30:27  *** TheRec has quit IRC
358 2020-09-17T15:30:27  *** TheRec_ has quit IRC
359 2020-09-17T15:30:27  *** TheRec_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
360 2020-09-17T15:33:07  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has quit IRC
361 2020-09-17T15:33:56  *** TheRec_ has quit IRC
362 2020-09-17T15:34:06  *** TheRec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
363 2020-09-17T15:34:06  *** TheRec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
364 2020-09-17T15:46:56  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
365 2020-09-17T15:49:21  *** Sleepnbum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
366 2020-09-17T15:55:05  *** arowser has quit IRC
367 2020-09-17T15:55:25  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
368 2020-09-17T15:56:26  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
369 2020-09-17T16:00:48  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
370 2020-09-17T16:02:03  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
371 2020-09-17T16:04:41  *** dom0 has quit IRC
372 2020-09-17T16:09:08  *** Kiminuo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
373 2020-09-17T16:09:35  *** isis_ is now known as isis
374 2020-09-17T16:24:05  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
375 2020-09-17T16:24:06  *** arowser has quit IRC
376 2020-09-17T16:24:24  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
377 2020-09-17T16:26:06  *** arowser has quit IRC
378 2020-09-17T16:26:24  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
379 2020-09-17T16:26:50  *** davec has quit IRC
380 2020-09-17T16:27:40  *** real_or_random has quit IRC
381 2020-09-17T16:29:09  *** real_or_random has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
382 2020-09-17T16:33:11  *** Highway62 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
383 2020-09-17T16:35:42  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
384 2020-09-17T16:35:42  *** Highway62 is now known as Highway61
385 2020-09-17T16:54:39  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
386 2020-09-17T17:01:26  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
387 2020-09-17T17:08:38  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
388 2020-09-17T17:09:16  *** S3RK has quit IRC
389 2020-09-17T17:10:49  *** owowo has quit IRC
390 2020-09-17T17:16:16  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
391 2020-09-17T17:17:28  *** mrostecki_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
392 2020-09-17T17:19:23  *** mrostecki has quit IRC
393 2020-09-17T17:25:03  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
394 2020-09-17T17:26:51  *** opsec_x12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
395 2020-09-17T17:29:50  <sipa> #proposedmeetingtopic Size limit for data-driven unit tests
396 2020-09-17T17:42:35  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
397 2020-09-17T17:43:59  *** davec has quit IRC
398 2020-09-17T17:47:45  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
399 2020-09-17T17:50:23  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
400 2020-09-17T17:52:05  *** promag has quit IRC
401 2020-09-17T17:55:34  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
402 2020-09-17T17:57:13  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
403 2020-09-17T18:00:02  *** jMCg has quit IRC
404 2020-09-17T18:00:26  *** davec has quit IRC
405 2020-09-17T18:01:40  *** S3RK has quit IRC
406 2020-09-17T18:07:11  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
407 2020-09-17T18:21:46  *** csslayer1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
408 2020-09-17T18:31:11  *** lightlike has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
409 2020-09-17T18:35:05  *** arowser has quit IRC
410 2020-09-17T18:35:24  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
411 2020-09-17T18:38:09  <ryanofsky> #proposedmeetingtopic https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/AssertLockHeld-PRs
412 2020-09-17T18:38:36  *** Sleepnbum has quit IRC
413 2020-09-17T18:45:03  <wumpus> many topics today!
414 2020-09-17T18:45:59  <sipa> all short ones, i hope
415 2020-09-17T18:50:16  <jonatack> we covered the torv3 transition a bit yesterday at https://bitcoincore.reviews/19845#l-270, feel free to drop if no need to re-discuss
416 2020-09-17T18:51:56  <wumpus> true, i'll move it last in that case
417 2020-09-17T18:54:46  <vasild> I have an excellent idea about renaming sendaddrv2 to a generic capabilities and making it possible to include various options inside it. Like capabilities(send me addrv2, I participate in gossip, whatnot, my favorite color is blue)
418 2020-09-17T18:55:01  <vasild> "excellent"... until somebody shoots it down :)
419 2020-09-17T18:57:10  <wumpus> things like that were proposed before, though never in the for of a BIP afaik, but I think that's out of scope of BIP155
420 2020-09-17T18:58:10  <wumpus> I think it'd be good to keep sendaddrv2's prameters restricted to things concerning, well, network addresses and address gossiping
421 2020-09-17T18:58:16  <vasild> I agree it is out of scope, but I also think "I participate in gossip" is out of scope for bip155, if we consider that its purpose is to support larger than 16 byte addresses
422 2020-09-17T18:58:17  <sipa> wumpus: agree
423 2020-09-17T18:58:33  <sipa> vasild: maybe...
424 2020-09-17T18:59:01  <wumpus> the deadlines for 0.21 are also getting closer, in case that's what you were aiming for
425 2020-09-17T19:00:06  <vasild> yeah
426 2020-09-17T19:00:21  <wumpus> vasild: well at least it's still close enough, proposing a general capability message is a can of worms
427 2020-09-17T19:00:35  <jnewbery> moot time
428 2020-09-17T19:00:42  <sipa> hi.
429 2020-09-17T19:00:46  <vasild> I was just thinking - if we make it sendaddrv2(your address is X, I participate in gossip) we may as well s/sendaddr/capabilities/ :)
430 2020-09-17T19:00:54  <wumpus> it also brings back the discussion of when to send it, for example, for a lot of capabilities you'd want to know them at connection time and not at some point later
431 2020-09-17T19:01:00  <wumpus> #startmeeting
432 2020-09-17T19:01:00  <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Sep 17 19:01:00 2020 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
433 2020-09-17T19:01:00  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
434 2020-09-17T19:01:02  <jnewbery> hi
435 2020-09-17T19:01:03  <sipa> vasild: i would really avoid doing anything that's unrelated to addr relay
436 2020-09-17T19:01:18  <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 ariard digi_james
437 2020-09-17T19:01:20  <sipa> just risks expanding the scope unboundedly
438 2020-09-17T19:01:21  <wumpus> amiti fjahr jeremyrubin lightlike emilengler jonatack hebasto jb55 elichai2
439 2020-09-17T19:01:22  <achow101> hi
440 2020-09-17T19:01:27  <wumpus> we have a lot of topics for today, so let's start quickly
441 2020-09-17T19:01:27  <provoostenator> hi
442 2020-09-17T19:01:29  <jonatack> bonsoir
443 2020-09-17T19:01:30  <meshcollider> hi
444 2020-09-17T19:01:31  <jb55> greetings
445 2020-09-17T19:01:33  <wumpus> #topic High priority for review
446 2020-09-17T19:01:34  <luke-jr> hi
447 2020-09-17T19:01:35  <vasild> sipa: wumpus: ok
448 2020-09-17T19:01:42  <kanzure> hi
449 2020-09-17T19:01:46  <michaelfolkson> hi
450 2020-09-17T19:01:48  <jonasschnelli> hi
451 2020-09-17T19:01:51  <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8  12 blockers, 1 bugfix, 2 chasing concept ACK
452 2020-09-17T19:02:10  <sipa> can i have #19953 ?
453 2020-09-17T19:02:13  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19953 | Implement BIP 340-342 validation (Schnorr/taproot/tapscript) by sipa · Pull Request #19953 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
454 2020-09-17T19:02:24  <wumpus> signet should be close to mergable, I hope we can get that one at least in for 0.21
455 2020-09-17T19:03:00  <wumpus> PSA: the release schedule deadlines for 0.21 start october 1: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18947
456 2020-09-17T19:03:01  <provoostenator>  #16546 is next in line for hardware wallet support
457 2020-09-17T19:03:04  <wumpus> sipa: sure
458 2020-09-17T19:03:05  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16546 | External signer support - Wallet Box edition by Sjors · Pull Request #16546 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
459 2020-09-17T19:04:07  <wumpus> provoostenator: sipa:  added
460 2020-09-17T19:04:18  <luke-jr> wumpus: let's put #11082 back in?
461 2020-09-17T19:04:21  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11082 | Add new bitcoin_rw.conf file that is used for settings modified by this software itself by luke-jr · Pull Request #11082 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
462 2020-09-17T19:05:00  <luke-jr> although it looks like I already have 2 there, the ramifications of missing 0.21 with this is pretty annoying
463 2020-09-17T19:05:27  <wumpus> I'm still not sure about the writable configuration files (didn't we have two conflicting systems now?) but in any case, added
464 2020-09-17T19:05:40  <wumpus> not the time to have that discussion now
465 2020-09-17T19:05:48  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
466 2020-09-17T19:05:59  <wumpus> #topic Endomorphism optimization in libsecp256k1 (sipa)
467 2020-09-17T19:06:05  <vasild> I have never seen such dual configs in any other software...
468 2020-09-17T19:06:06  <sipa> hi!
469 2020-09-17T19:06:25  <sipa> this is mostly a short announcement so it doesn't cause any surprise
470 2020-09-17T19:07:05  <sipa> libsecp256k1 started out as an experiment to see how much secp256k1 EC operations could be made by using the GLV endomorphism optimization, which it was specifically designed to support, but not actually implemented anywhere
471 2020-09-17T19:07:09  <luke-jr> vasild: that's kinda the point; it reduces to one config format
472 2020-09-17T19:07:24  <fjahr> hi
473 2020-09-17T19:07:45  <sipa> as it turned out that there is some risk it is encumbered by a patent, the GLV optimization was made optional, and defaults to off (and has been off in every bitcoin core release)
474 2020-09-17T19:08:14  <sipa> it looks like that patent is expiring on september 25th, and blockstream had a patent attorney verify that (i'm happy to share their findings, if anyone cares)
475 2020-09-17T19:08:27  <wumpus> yay!
476 2020-09-17T19:08:31  <cfields> wooo!
477 2020-09-17T19:08:36  <luke-jr> sipa: how sure can we be that it can't break consensus?
478 2020-09-17T19:08:56  <sipa> so the plan is to switch it to default on after that date, or even rip out the non-GLV code
479 2020-09-17T19:08:58  <sipa> luke-jr: good question
480 2020-09-17T19:09:13  <luke-jr> is it provable? :x
481 2020-09-17T19:09:16  <sipa> libsecp256k1' CI has always tested with both endomorphism enabled and disabled
482 2020-09-17T19:09:42  <sipa> including our exhaustive tests, which are probably as close to a mathemetical proof we can get for real software - at least for some aspects
483 2020-09-17T19:10:24  <sipa> fwiw, that's a test where the library is compiled with a slightly different curve equation that makes it trivially insecure, and only leaves 12 valid private/public keys
484 2020-09-17T19:10:45  <sipa> and in that mode, we can test literally every combination of signature/pubkey/private key
485 2020-09-17T19:11:28  <wumpus> nice
486 2020-09-17T19:11:31  <sipa> so i think that given that, it shouldn't be any more invasive than regular code changes to libsecp256k1
487 2020-09-17T19:11:35  <luke-jr> has it been proven on a mathematical level? (not saying it's a problem if not, just asking)
488 2020-09-17T19:12:19  <sipa> luke-jr: for some parts of the code we have actual proofs (some hand-written, some automatic); though admittedly not the part touched by the endomorphism
489 2020-09-17T19:12:35  <wumpus> I think he means in mathetmatical theory, not so much the specific code
490 2020-09-17T19:12:40  <luke-jr> right
491 2020-09-17T19:13:12  <sipa> wumpus: for the group arithmetic, there is a transliteration of the C code to python, which is then symbolically executed and can be automatically proven correct
492 2020-09-17T19:13:17  *** guest534543 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
493 2020-09-17T19:13:37  <provoostenator> Very cool, somewhat scary, but how much of a speedup is this?
494 2020-09-17T19:13:37  <sipa> the conversion from C to Python (or its semantics) of course aren't, but the algorithms at a slightly higher level are proven
495 2020-09-17T19:13:39  <wumpus> sipa: that's a very interesting approach
496 2020-09-17T19:13:47  <sipa> provoostenator: 27% for ecdsa verification
497 2020-09-17T19:13:59  <provoostenator> Ok, that's worth some code review time alright.
498 2020-09-17T19:14:00  <wumpus> very hard to say no to that :)
499 2020-09-17T19:14:16  <sipa> well
500 2020-09-17T19:14:24  <sipa> arguably, libsecp256k1 originally _only_ had the GLV mode
501 2020-09-17T19:14:40  *** davec has quit IRC
502 2020-09-17T19:14:43  <sipa> the mode where GLV was disabled (which is now default) was added later
503 2020-09-17T19:14:56  <wumpus> yes it was added out of patent concerns
504 2020-09-17T19:15:02  <sipa> yes
505 2020-09-17T19:15:22  <sipa> but all changes since 2013 have always kept both GLV and non-GLV working, and tested
506 2020-09-17T19:15:27  <meshcollider> Interesting, I didn't know that
507 2020-09-17T19:15:34  <luke-jr> was the GLV mode ever released in Core?
508 2020-09-17T19:15:47  <wumpus> no
509 2020-09-17T19:15:59  <sipa> luke-jr: it's a compile time option, and it was never enabled in (default) builds of core
510 2020-09-17T19:16:10  <sipa> you could always enable it yourself with --enable-endomorphism
511 2020-09-17T19:16:14  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
512 2020-09-17T19:16:25  <luke-jr> right, not sure how many people actually did that tho :p
513 2020-09-17T19:16:43  <wumpus> some people did it for benchmarking at times
514 2020-09-17T19:16:49  *** Kiminuo has quit IRC
515 2020-09-17T19:16:50  <wumpus> apart from that, dunno
516 2020-09-17T19:16:54  <sipa> luke-jr: i assume nobody
517 2020-09-17T19:16:57  <vasild> If there are concernts, what about doing all calculus in both and comparing they produce the same result?
518 2020-09-17T19:17:12  <luke-jr> we do have a USE flag for it in Gentoo, but no metrics on usage
519 2020-09-17T19:17:16  <sipa> vasild: that's arguably what the unit tests are doing
520 2020-09-17T19:17:26  <sipa> if they differed, at least one would fail
521 2020-09-17T19:17:43  <luke-jr> vasild: you mean in real-world use? what's the point?
522 2020-09-17T19:17:46  <meshcollider> sipa: why not just test it out on all secp256k1 keys to make sure ;)
523 2020-09-17T19:17:57  <sipa> meshcollider: that's what the exhaustive test mode does
524 2020-09-17T19:17:58  <luke-jr> meshcollider: :D
525 2020-09-17T19:18:01  <vasild> I mean, in real life, in production, for e.g. 6 months. But I am not suggesting that, just saying "if there are concerns" :)
526 2020-09-17T19:18:07  <sipa> vasild: i believe that is pointless
527 2020-09-17T19:18:21  <vasild> ok, I can't judge
528 2020-09-17T19:18:33  <sipa> due to the cryptographic nature of things, actual correct _random_ usage is never going to trigger an edge case if one existed
529 2020-09-17T19:18:34  <luke-jr> I think you could just build with it enabled, and do a full sync
530 2020-09-17T19:18:41  <wumpus> trying completely random input is very likely not going to find anything
531 2020-09-17T19:18:44  <wumpus> right
532 2020-09-17T19:18:45  <luke-jr> if anything deviates, the sync should fail, right?
533 2020-09-17T19:19:07  <sipa> luke-jr: in theory it could be accepting invalid signatures, which wouldn't be caught by such a test
534 2020-09-17T19:19:17  <sipa> though again, this is true for every change to the cryptographic code
535 2020-09-17T19:19:24  <luke-jr> sipa: but vasild's suggestion wouldn't detect that either
536 2020-09-17T19:19:30  <sipa> luke-jr: indeed
537 2020-09-17T19:19:38  <sipa> the exhaustive test likely would though
538 2020-09-17T19:19:58  <sipa> or at least, has a reasonable chance to - it depends on the nature of the hypothetical bug
539 2020-09-17T19:20:53  <sipa> https://patents.google.com/patent/US7110538B2/en
540 2020-09-17T19:20:59  <wumpus> I'd assume you have 100% code coverage of that code in the test? (not that that proves anything, of course, but at least all paths are being exercised)
541 2020-09-17T19:21:19  *** go11111111111 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
542 2020-09-17T19:21:40  <sipa> wumpus: i believe we have code coverage of everything that isn't impossible to reach, but i'll go verify that
543 2020-09-17T19:22:01  <wumpus> sipa: thanks!
544 2020-09-17T19:22:01  *** go121212 has quit IRC
545 2020-09-17T19:22:29  <sipa> so, expect a libsecp256k1 update shortly after september 25th
546 2020-09-17T19:22:49  <wumpus> thanks for the announcement sipa, let's move to next topic
547 2020-09-17T19:22:51  <sipa> discussion on testing and whatnot can still happen in the PR
548 2020-09-17T19:22:55  <sipa> that's all from me
549 2020-09-17T19:23:00  <jnewbery> that's great news sipa!
550 2020-09-17T19:23:07  <wumpus> #topic How should signet params be prefixed? (kallewoof)
551 2020-09-17T19:23:38  <wumpus> basically my comment here https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18267#discussion_r488814952
552 2020-09-17T19:23:48  <jonatack> i suppose signetchallenge, as that's how all the others are, except reindex-chainstate that uses lispy kebab-case
553 2020-09-17T19:24:13  <wumpus> I didn't like _ in command line parameters, - would be ok-ish with me (because it matches the - symbol at the beginning), but our convention seems to be to just concatentate
554 2020-09-17T19:24:16  <sipa> it looks like all 3 styles are used; there is -rpcpport, there is -reindex-chainstate, there is -output_csv (to bench)
555 2020-09-17T19:24:39  <sipa> my preference is the first (just squeeze things), but apart from that i don't care, and i don't think it's worth much discussion time :)
556 2020-09-17T19:24:43  <wumpus> _ is definitely the worst to me at least, it's harder to type too
557 2020-09-17T19:25:22  <luke-jr> why not -signet=<param>
558 2020-09-17T19:25:22  <wumpus> I do think it is good to be consistent and come up with a standard way also for future arguments
559 2020-09-17T19:25:44  <achow101> traditionally we just stick them together without any separator, so just do that?
560 2020-09-17T19:25:47  <wumpus> luke-jr: because there may be other signet arguments in the future
561 2020-09-17T19:26:10  <sipa> there are several alredy
562 2020-09-17T19:26:26  <wumpus> and it's more consistent with -regtest -testnet to have it as a boolean anyhow
563 2020-09-17T19:26:41  <wumpus> yes
564 2020-09-17T19:26:52  <wumpus> achow101: +1
565 2020-09-17T19:27:08  <jnewbery> ACK squeezecase
566 2020-09-17T19:27:45  <wumpus> okay, the sentiment here seems to be clear, if no one else is going to weigh in, we're going to next topic
567 2020-09-17T19:28:14  <wumpus> #topic Size limit for data-driven unit tests (sipa)
568 2020-09-17T19:28:27  <sipa> hi!
569 2020-09-17T19:29:26  <luke-jr> o hai thar sipa?
570 2020-09-17T19:29:27  <sipa> in #19953 i've recently added a unit test with randomly-generated transaction validation success/failure cases, minimized using the fuzzing framework (it's not an actual fuzzer, all input is generated by a python script, but just minimized using the fuzz build)
571 2020-09-17T19:29:29  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19953 | Implement BIP 340-342 validation (Schnorr/taproot/tapscript) by sipa · Pull Request #19953 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
572 2020-09-17T19:29:54  <sipa> which i think is an interesting approach as it permits getting the kind of coverage you get by running the python functional test for days... weeks...
573 2020-09-17T19:30:10  <sipa> it's 250 kB now, which seems in line with some of the other tests we have
574 2020-09-17T19:30:26  <sipa> but i could extend this to test more things, and in particular more validation flags
575 2020-09-17T19:30:33  <luke-jr> does that create a dep on fuzzing stuff for normal tests? :x
576 2020-09-17T19:30:41  <sipa> luke-jr: nope, just a json file
577 2020-09-17T19:30:51  <sipa> with the output of the whole fuzzing procedure
578 2020-09-17T19:31:00  <luke-jr> aha
579 2020-09-17T19:31:22  <sipa> anyway, trying to extend this, using the same approach, leaves me with things in the 1-2 MB range
580 2020-09-17T19:31:25  <wumpus> I think we should be careful to not add too much data for tests to the repository, git is not that great for bulk data storage, though 250kB seems fine to me
581 2020-09-17T19:31:28  <sipa> and i was wondering if that's acceptable
582 2020-09-17T19:31:54  <sipa> there are many more tradeoffs possible, which can reduce that - or extend it - in exchange for coverage/development time
583 2020-09-17T19:32:07  <sipa> but if people are like "1 MB is just fine", that would simplify things
584 2020-09-17T19:32:21  <wumpus> another drawback of large files is that it generates huge diffs, and this isn't really reviewable
585 2020-09-17T19:32:23  <jonasschnelli> I guess the runtime memory requirements are unchanged for that?
586 2020-09-17T19:32:35  <sipa> jonasschnelli: yes, it's just a (very simple) unit test
587 2020-09-17T19:32:40  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: yes, it's only used at test time
588 2020-09-17T19:32:41  <sipa> it's also 1 MB of json which is presumably compressed quite a bit by git
589 2020-09-17T19:32:42  <cfields> sipa: does it compress at all in git?
590 2020-09-17T19:32:47  <vasild> the json contains ascii hex, what if we save it in binary? would be 2x reduce
591 2020-09-17T19:32:49  <cfields> hah
592 2020-09-17T19:33:22  <wumpus> but as it's part of a unit test it also can't easily be moved to another repository like the fuzz dataset one
593 2020-09-17T19:33:48  <sipa> vasild: yes, possible - but if git compresses it already in a similar degree, leaving it in a more readable form has advantages
594 2020-09-17T19:33:59  <luke-jr> is there a reason not to just make this part of the fuzzer build?
595 2020-09-17T19:34:09  <sipa> luke-jr: it's not a fuzzer
596 2020-09-17T19:34:16  <sipa> you can't run it as a fuzzer
597 2020-09-17T19:34:34  <sipa> (it would immediately fail, as it's not testing random inputs)
598 2020-09-17T19:34:42  <vasild> sipa: right, I guess disk space when checked out is irrelevant for such sizes
599 2020-09-17T19:34:57  <luke-jr> sipa: but can't the 250k be generated at test-time?
600 2020-09-17T19:35:02  <sipa> luke-jr: it took me days
601 2020-09-17T19:35:11  <luke-jr> hmm
602 2020-09-17T19:35:15  <sipa> (of CPU time)
603 2020-09-17T19:35:17  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
604 2020-09-17T19:35:23  <luke-jr> a special make target?
605 2020-09-17T19:35:29  <sipa> it's nondeterministic
606 2020-09-17T19:35:36  <jnewbery> is https://github.com/bitcoin-core/qa-assets used for test assets?
607 2020-09-17T19:35:42  <jonasschnelli> +1
608 2020-09-17T19:35:54  <wumpus> jnewbery: yes, that's what I meant, the only thing is that it takes an extra step then
609 2020-09-17T19:35:54  <sipa> luke-jr: to be clear, this is a test that _already_ runs as a functional test, but only for 1 minute
610 2020-09-17T19:36:17  <wumpus> someone who wants to read the test also needs that erpository checked out -- not a problem for the CI at leat
611 2020-09-17T19:36:28  <sipa> luke-jr: the approach to extract a very-good-coverage unit test from it makes it a bit more accessible and reusable, and gives the same coverage as running the functional test 1000s of times
612 2020-09-17T19:36:46  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
613 2020-09-17T19:36:58  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
614 2020-09-17T19:36:58  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
615 2020-09-17T19:37:05  <sipa> wumpus: that's reasonable, i guess
616 2020-09-17T19:37:22  <sipa> skip the test if the json file isn't found
617 2020-09-17T19:37:28  <sipa> or something like that
618 2020-09-17T19:37:35  <wumpus> sipa: yes, sounds fair to me
619 2020-09-17T19:38:02  * luke-jr glares at boost for not supporting skips still (last I checked)
620 2020-09-17T19:38:24  <wumpus> though there are already some ~250kB json files in the repo, for the tests, I don't think one more is that bad... but let's not make a habit out of it, and also, you're planning to add more data in the future
621 2020-09-17T19:38:31  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
622 2020-09-17T19:38:35  <ryanofsky> I like the qa assetts idea. Skipping the test if input not found is also similar to what we do for backwards compatibility tests
623 2020-09-17T19:38:39  <sipa> luke-jr: "return true;" works great
624 2020-09-17T19:38:44  <wumpus> yes
625 2020-09-17T19:38:55  <luke-jr> sipa: except it gives the impression it passed?
626 2020-09-17T19:39:00  <ryanofsky> No objection to 250kb either, though
627 2020-09-17T19:39:34  *** S3RK has quit IRC
628 2020-09-17T19:39:38  <sipa> luke-jr: "make check" also doesn't run the fuzz tests; does that give the impression they passed? :)
629 2020-09-17T19:39:55  <sipa> there could be a "notice: qa-assets not found, so large data-driven tests are skipped"
630 2020-09-17T19:39:55  <luke-jr> sipa: boost explicitly says the tests pass..
631 2020-09-17T19:40:14  <sipa> luke-jr: in aggregate
632 2020-09-17T19:40:20  <luke-jr> sipa: individually
633 2020-09-17T19:40:25  <luke-jr> sipa: this is a problem for another test already IIRC
634 2020-09-17T19:40:29  <wumpus> ok, I think we've given sipa quite some input on this for now, decision doesn't need to be made in the meeting, only ~20 minutes left, and 1 or 2 topics
635 2020-09-17T19:40:38  <wumpus> #topic AssertLockHeld PRs (ryanofsky)
636 2020-09-17T19:40:51  <ryanofsky> Debug lockerorder test is a test that passes if skipped, but minor one
637 2020-09-17T19:41:10  <ryanofsky> For AssertLockHeld PRs, I just wanted to advertise wiki page https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/AssertLockHeld-PRs
638 2020-09-17T19:41:29  <ryanofsky> If anyone is interested in AssertLockHeld improvements but confused by the multiple PRs, page summarizes them
639 2020-09-17T19:41:57  <sipa> ryanofsky: thanks for that
640 2020-09-17T19:42:04  <jonatack> ryanofsky: v nice
641 2020-09-17T19:42:06  * sipa is quite overwhelmed by it
642 2020-09-17T19:42:11  <wumpus> yes good to have an overview
643 2020-09-17T19:42:24  <ryanofsky> Sure, that's all I have for the topic
644 2020-09-17T19:42:57  <wumpus> what would "WeaklyAssertLockHeld" do compared to the normal assert?
645 2020-09-17T19:43:20  <vasild> indeed! (confusing name)
646 2020-09-17T19:43:49  <ryanofsky> They both do the same thing at runtime, which is why my preference is to have one assert instead of two
647 2020-09-17T19:44:23  <sipa> and the difference is that one also does a compile-check (if supported) and the other doesn't?
648 2020-09-17T19:44:25  <wumpus> it sounds really weird to me a lock is held or not :)
649 2020-09-17T19:44:25  <ryanofsky> But if we can't have one assert, there are cases where the stronger assert isn't accepted at compile time and you need to use the weaker one
650 2020-09-17T19:44:27  <vasild> btw, one of the clang people suggested that we don't annotate AssertLockHeld() with any compile time attributes and leave it pure run time.
651 2020-09-17T19:44:43  <wumpus> oh, like that
652 2020-09-17T19:45:28  <luke-jr> I don't get why one would use Assert* instead of EXCLUSIVE_LOCKS_REQUIRED
653 2020-09-17T19:45:41  <luke-jr> outside of perhaps a conditional
654 2020-09-17T19:45:53  <wumpus> it's an assertion that existed way before the lock annotations did
655 2020-09-17T19:46:04  <sipa> lock annotations also only work in clang
656 2020-09-17T19:46:09  <wumpus> ouch
657 2020-09-17T19:46:11  <luke-jr> oh :/
658 2020-09-17T19:46:16  <sipa> and can't be used for some of the more complex cases, i assume
659 2020-09-17T19:46:29  <vasild> luke-jr: runtime asserts work always, compile time _warnings_ - only for clang and if you compile with --enable-werror and if clang does not have bugs etc
660 2020-09-17T19:46:32  <ryanofsky> luke-jr, infrequently there are cases where the compile can't know EXCLUSIVE_LOCKS_REQUIRED is satisfied and you have to tell it that
661 2020-09-17T19:46:46  <sipa> vasild: well, they only work in -DDEBUG_LOCKORDER mode, which you don't want to use for production :)
662 2020-09-17T19:46:50  <ryanofsky> that is what assert is useful for
663 2020-09-17T19:47:15  <sipa> so they're overlapping but one is not a subset of the other, in terms of what they can detect
664 2020-09-17T19:47:16  <ryanofsky> the other thing assert is useful for (i don't think very useful) is when compile time checks are unavailable or disabled or buggy
665 2020-09-17T19:47:51  <wumpus> apparently they're clang only so they're often not available
666 2020-09-17T19:48:15  <wumpus> i'm fairly sure most people compile with gcc, at least on linux
667 2020-09-17T19:48:21  <ryanofsky> right but they run on CI
668 2020-09-17T19:49:05  <ryanofsky> and if you are compiling with gcc, you have to enable run time checks and execute the code and hope an assert is hit to see any benefit from it
669 2020-09-17T19:49:26  <wumpus> yes
670 2020-09-17T19:49:43  <vasild> having CI as the sole protection seems uncomfortable to me - it does not run manual tests
671 2020-09-17T19:49:55  <vasild> developers do on their machines
672 2020-09-17T19:50:14  <luke-jr> ideally all tests would exist in the automated form ;)
673 2020-09-17T19:50:37  <ryanofsky> vasild, compile time checks check correctness at compile time they have no effect on runtime generated code
674 2020-09-17T19:50:45  <wumpus> i wonder how many developers are compiling with DEBUG_LOCKORDER anyway, well probably those that are working on locking changes do
675 2020-09-17T19:50:51  <ryanofsky> there's 0 benefit to compiling with compiling checks and then running bitcoind locally
676 2020-09-17T19:51:02  <vasild> wumpus: it is enabled bug --enable-debug
677 2020-09-17T19:51:15  <vasild> by
678 2020-09-17T19:51:27  <wumpus> yes
679 2020-09-17T19:51:46  <sipa> "Bitcoin Core developer claims enabling debugging introduces bug"
680 2020-09-17T19:52:08  <vasild> "fixes the bug by disabling debugging"
681 2020-09-17T19:52:15  <luke-jr> src/Makefile:CXXFLAGS = -Wthread-safety-analysis -DDEBUG_LOCKORDER -O1 -ggdb -Wall -Werror=thread-safety-analysis -fsanitize=undefined
682 2020-09-17T19:52:18  <luke-jr> apparently I am
683 2020-09-17T19:52:43  <jonatack> I debug-build with clang on some PRs
684 2020-09-17T19:52:55  <wumpus> ok if we still want to discuss torv3, we'll have to switch topics now
685 2020-09-17T19:52:56  <luke-jr> mind you, I never use dev code for mainnet
686 2020-09-17T19:53:08  * luke-jr wonders when a 1 hour limit was set in the first place :P
687 2020-09-17T19:53:20  <wumpus> because it's good to keep meetings short
688 2020-09-17T19:53:23  <wumpus> #topic torv2->torv3 transition, schedule, process (jonatack)
689 2020-09-17T19:53:25  <jonatack> Per this Tor ML post https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2020-June/014365.html
690 2020-09-17T19:53:43  <jonatack>  Tor v2 was deprecated the day before yesterday (September 15, 2020) with 0.4.4.x and will be obsoleted in 0.4.6.x (July 15, 2021)
691 2020-09-17T19:53:52  <jonatack>  Tor v2 is expected to be completely disabled in Tor client stable versions on October 15, 2021
692 2020-09-17T19:54:04  <wumpus> previous discussion from the review meeting yesterday: https://bitcoincore.reviews/19845#l-270
693 2020-09-17T19:54:12  <luke-jr> is this a network-level change, or just dependency change?
694 2020-09-17T19:54:26  <luke-jr> ie, does Tor v2 stop working for old versions too?
695 2020-09-17T19:54:39  <jonatack> a half-dozen of us are running nodes with tor v3 services ATM
696 2020-09-17T19:54:50  <sipa> luke-jr: i assume it will, due to network infrastructing updating to versions that don't support torv2 anymore
697 2020-09-17T19:54:59  <vasild> luke-jr: they say torv2 is going to be removed from the source code of Tor
698 2020-09-17T19:54:59  <jonatack> using #19954 / aka PR 19031
699 2020-09-17T19:55:01  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19954 | tor: make a TORv3 hidden service instead of TORv2 by vasild · Pull Request #19954 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
700 2020-09-17T19:55:05  <wumpus> luke-jr: that's not entirely clear to me; but I assume they'll shut down the directory authorities etc for torv2 too
701 2020-09-17T19:55:41  <jonatack> "We will release new Tor client stable versions for all supported series that will disable v2."
702 2020-09-17T19:55:55  <jonatack> on Oct 15 2021 per https://blog.torproject.org/v2-deprecation-timeline
703 2020-09-17T19:56:06  <jonatack> "This effectively means that from today (July 2nd, 2020), the Internet has around 16 months to migrate from v2 to v3 once and for all."
704 2020-09-17T19:56:30  <sipa> that sounds like torv2 will stop working in oct 2021
705 2020-09-17T19:56:51  <vasild> they probably realize that if they leave torv2 working, there will be still people using it after 10 years
706 2020-09-17T19:56:54  <wumpus> let's try to get basic (if we can't get all) torv3 support into 0.21.0
707 2020-09-17T19:57:07  <sipa> wumpus: seems doable
708 2020-09-17T19:57:22  <jonatack> we're ~5 commits away
709 2020-09-17T19:57:26  <wumpus> better to have things prepared in time than to wait for last minute
710 2020-09-17T19:57:34  <jonatack> 19845 + 19954 i believe
711 2020-09-17T19:57:42  <wumpus> yea it's not too much anymore
712 2020-09-17T19:58:10  <vasild> http://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/log-2020-09-16.html#l-243
713 2020-09-17T19:58:24  <sipa> wumpus: also, ack bip155 changes, as those need to be stable before 0.21 if we want it :)
714 2020-09-17T19:58:34  <jonatack> at first, will nodes gossip both v2 and v3?
715 2020-09-17T19:58:36  <wumpus> sipa: yes
716 2020-09-17T19:58:57  <wumpus> jonatack: i think that would make sense
717 2020-09-17T19:59:04  <sipa> agree
718 2020-09-17T19:59:22  <vasild> stopping gossip of torv2 we can consider after Oct 2021
719 2020-09-17T19:59:40  <jonatack> sgtm
720 2020-09-17T19:59:41  <wumpus> maybe it should support the case where tor refuses to create a v2 service, to be future proof
721 2020-09-17T19:59:59  <wumpus> e.g. not make that a fatal error
722 2020-09-17T20:00:36  <sipa> is anything in torcontrol a fatal error?
723 2020-09-17T20:00:37  <vasild> in 19954 we only ever try to create torv3 service
724 2020-09-17T20:00:40  <jonatack> atm 19954 only rumours v3?
725 2020-09-17T20:00:42  *** arowser has quit IRC
726 2020-09-17T20:01:01  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
727 2020-09-17T20:01:08  <wumpus> sipa: not for bitcoind entirely, but any error will stop it from going forward in torcontrol
728 2020-09-17T20:01:26  <vasild> "atm 19954 only rumours v3?" - no, it would rumor (gossip) both torv2 and torv3
729 2020-09-17T20:01:49  <wumpus> great!
730 2020-09-17T20:02:15  <wumpus> #endmeeting
731 2020-09-17T20:02:15  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Sep 17 20:02:15 2020 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
732 2020-09-17T20:02:15  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-09-17-19.01.html
733 2020-09-17T20:02:15  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-09-17-19.01.txt
734 2020-09-17T20:02:15  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-09-17-19.01.log.html
735 2020-09-17T20:02:18  <jonatack> right, but only v3 service not v2?
736 2020-09-17T20:02:29  <vasild> 19954 is only about when bitcoin core creates a tor hidden service automatically via the tor control connection -- it would start creating torv3 with that PR
737 2020-09-17T20:02:53  <jonatack> i certainly only see a v3 local address with 19954
738 2020-09-17T20:03:00  <luke-jr> I prefer to add features, and remove others, in separate PRs ;)
739 2020-09-17T20:03:10  <sipa> luke-jr: fwiw, perhaps i misunderstood your question earlier; the concept of the endomorphism optimization is easy to prove (it's a standard result in algebraic geometry) - so we know that if implemented correctly, it works
740 2020-09-17T20:03:27  <luke-jr> sipa: great, that's what I meant
741 2020-09-17T20:04:24  <jonatack> vasild: ok i'll look into what happens with the proxy and 19954
742 2020-09-17T20:04:43  *** cltrbreak_MAD2 has quit IRC
743 2020-09-17T20:04:49  <sipa> luke-jr: in slightly more detail, it's similar to how we know that -(x,y) = (x,-y) for elliptic curve points
744 2020-09-17T20:05:10  <luke-jr> >implying I understand EC :p
745 2020-09-17T20:05:25  <sipa> luke-jr: "negating a point negates the Y coordinate"
746 2020-09-17T20:05:29  *** ctrlbreak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
747 2020-09-17T20:05:30  <sipa> does that sounds familiar?
748 2020-09-17T20:05:33  <luke-jr> no
749 2020-09-17T20:05:37  <sipa> ok!
750 2020-09-17T20:06:16  <sipa> luke-jr: you know how compressed public keys consist of 0x02 or 0x03, followed by 32 bytes X coordinate?
751 2020-09-17T20:06:29  <luke-jr> sure
752 2020-09-17T20:07:19  <michaelfolkson> With my untrained eye Signet and Tor v3 both seem to be a rush to get in for October. What is the history of new features like that needing updates in minor versions because they weren't fully cooked for the major version they were part of?
753 2020-09-17T20:07:29  <sipa> luke-jr: the 0x02 indicates whether the Y coordinate is odd or even; that works because for every point, a point with the same X coordinate but opposite Y coordinate exists (and modulo p, negating changes odd to even and the other way around)
754 2020-09-17T20:08:04  <luke-jr> sipa: btw don't feel like you need to explain it to me - I'm sure if I read through gmax's educational material I'd understand
755 2020-09-17T20:08:10  <sipa> ok
756 2020-09-17T20:09:21  <luke-jr> michaelfolkson: for software in general, there's a general idea that .0 will have bugs :P
757 2020-09-17T20:09:21  <michaelfolkson> Haven't seen any gmax educational material teaching EC. Any links?!
758 2020-09-17T20:09:59  <michaelfolkson> Ok luke-jr. So it is kind of expected that Signet and Tor might need to be cleaned up in minor versions
759 2020-09-17T20:10:02  <wumpus> michaelfolkson: it's often been done
760 2020-09-17T20:10:41  <vasild> michaelfolkson: so far torv3 has been going very steadily (no rush so far)
761 2020-09-17T20:10:51  <luke-jr> michaelfolkson: crap, I think I lost it
762 2020-09-17T20:11:13  *** lightlike has quit IRC
763 2020-09-17T20:11:21  <michaelfolkson> Yeah definitely not so far vasild. Just projecting forward
764 2020-09-17T20:11:24  <vasild> that does not mean it is not going to be rushed from here :)
765 2020-09-17T20:11:29  <wumpus> we've had much more rushed things in .0 major releases, signet and torv3 have been going on for a while and don't seem super hurried
766 2020-09-17T20:12:01  <sipa> right, there is a difference between prioritizing and rushing
767 2020-09-17T20:12:07  <wumpus> obviously I didn't mean "it needs to be in 0.21 at all costs", that's not how our releases work
768 2020-09-17T20:12:11  <luke-jr> michaelfolkson: I think it was once under https://people.xiph.org/~greg/ which is now 404 :/
769 2020-09-17T20:12:38  <michaelfolkson> Ah ok never mind. Thanks for looking luke-jr
770 2020-09-17T20:12:48  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
771 2020-09-17T20:13:52  <michaelfolkson> And then to stir the pot, ideally we would have Signet in 0.21 to encourage Taproot testing on Signet?
772 2020-09-17T20:13:54  <wumpus> signet is entirely opt-in, it's not that bad if it's still somewhat experimental, the important thing is that it doesn't break non-signet use
773 2020-09-17T20:14:36  <michaelfolkson> No because it woulds still need to be a custom Signet for Taproot testing
774 2020-09-17T20:14:54  <michaelfolkson> And the 0.21 release will be the default Signet (hopefully)
775 2020-09-17T20:14:56  <sipa> taproot can be soft-forked into signet if the signers decide so
776 2020-09-17T20:15:56  <wumpus> the Tor changes should definitely be correct in one go, it would be really bad to break Tor support, but we have a lot of interest and testing for that so I'm not too afraid
777 2020-09-17T20:16:20  <michaelfolkson> Ok so (hopefully) Signet in 0.21 and then Taproot could be soft forked into Signet by the signers in a minor release or the next major Core release?
778 2020-09-17T20:16:25  <sipa> kallewoof, aj: would it be useful to have different terms between signet (as in the bitcoind mode that enables signet configuration/rules) and signet (the default global testnet run by you two)
779 2020-09-17T20:16:34  *** Aden_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
780 2020-09-17T20:17:25  *** S3RK has quit IRC
781 2020-09-17T20:17:48  <michaelfolkson> Soft forking Signet for Taproot testing should be a given. That obviously doesn't mean anything in terms of a final community decision on Taproot activation etc for mainnet
782 2020-09-17T20:18:27  *** csslayer1 has quit IRC
783 2020-09-17T20:19:30  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
784 2020-09-17T20:19:44  <aj> sipa: "default signet", "custom signets" are the terms to distinguish the the one kallewoof and i sign from what anyone else might set up
785 2020-09-17T20:20:11  <sipa> aj: that sounds embarassingly sane
786 2020-09-17T20:20:53  <michaelfolkson> I think I proposed "main signet" lol
787 2020-09-17T20:22:06  *** isis is now known as isis_
788 2020-09-17T20:23:31  *** ctrlbreak_MAD has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
789 2020-09-17T20:24:58  <michaelfolkson> What is your latest thinking on updating proposed soft forks for mainnet that are already on Signet aj? Still effective hard forks?
790 2020-09-17T20:26:09  *** cltrbreak_MAD2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
791 2020-09-17T20:26:38  *** ctrlbreak has quit IRC
792 2020-09-17T20:29:52  *** jaybny has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
793 2020-09-17T20:29:52  *** ctrlbreak_MAD has quit IRC
794 2020-09-17T20:36:13  *** davidfischer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
795 2020-09-17T20:37:37  *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
796 2020-09-17T20:37:40  <aj> michaelfolkson: updates to not-activated-on-testnet/mainnet or not-merged-to-master consensus changes might well be hard forks from vN to v(N+1) (or commit xxxxx^ to xxxxx), question is just how to deal with that
797 2020-09-17T20:40:06  <aj> ryanofsky: "AJA" is precisely "2A" except calling it "LOCK_ALREADY_HELD" instead of "WeaklyAssertLock"
798 2020-09-17T20:40:44  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
799 2020-09-17T20:42:02  *** S3RK has quit IRC
800 2020-09-17T20:43:14  *** promag has quit IRC
801 2020-09-17T20:44:13  <elichai2> luke-jr: fwiw I'm running with endomorphism for at least a year while updating each release and IBDing with assumevalid=0
802 2020-09-17T20:44:39  *** kristapsk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
803 2020-09-17T20:45:44  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
804 2020-09-17T20:45:44  *** promag has quit IRC
805 2020-09-17T20:46:02  <instagibbs> elichai2, "hello, policia?".gif
806 2020-09-17T20:46:36  <instagibbs> what was the overall difference?
807 2020-09-17T20:47:34  <elichai2> I didn't test the differences actually, but I think I got something like ~4 hours for full ibd with assumevalid=0 last time, I should retry without redownloading
808 2020-09-17T20:48:00  <elichai2> But my point was about "is anyone using this" and "sync will fail if it's wrong" :)
809 2020-09-17T20:48:25  <elichai2> Hehe yeah I'm sure they wanna sue me for patent infringement lol
810 2020-09-17T20:50:05  *** guest534543 has quit IRC
811 2020-09-17T20:50:21  *** jaybny has quit IRC
812 2020-09-17T20:50:39  <elichai2> (about the topic, it might be a bit late but I personally would love to see those ifdefs on endo being removed :) I think it will even potentially increase the security of the code because of less preprocessor complexity and compile options)
813 2020-09-17T20:57:37  * jonatack elichai2 hears an early-morning knock at the door
814 2020-09-17T20:58:12  <jonatack> elichai2: pretty cool that you've been testing it. i wondered what that was, TIL
815 2020-09-17T20:59:17  <elichai2> Yeah it's a great perf boost :)
816 2020-09-17T21:00:02  *** davidfischer has quit IRC
817 2020-09-17T21:00:04  <jonatack> my 4 cores of cpu will be happy about that
818 2020-09-17T21:00:13  <instagibbs> IIRC the endomorphism was the inspiration for libsecp
819 2020-09-17T21:00:37  <instagibbs> sipa tried it out then got rabbit holed
820 2020-09-17T21:00:40  <sipa> instagibbs: yes, read meeting log from today :)
821 2020-09-17T21:01:02  <elichai2> I'm also testing with libgmp although that will hopefully won't be needed anymore very soon🙏
822 2020-09-17T21:06:55  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
823 2020-09-17T21:07:51  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
824 2020-09-17T21:10:45  *** someone235 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
825 2020-09-17T21:12:11  *** rc_423 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
826 2020-09-17T21:15:19  *** ghjkhjkhjk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
827 2020-09-17T21:22:10  *** izaki has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
828 2020-09-17T21:22:19  *** izaki is now known as Guest55194
829 2020-09-17T21:22:22  *** Kiminuo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
830 2020-09-17T21:28:39  <jonatack> vasild: Ok now have the node advertising both torv2 and torv3 local addresses...just needed to set proxy= rather than letting bitcoin core create a tor HS automatically, as you mentioned
831 2020-09-17T21:29:37  <jonatack> (d'oh--and all good)
832 2020-09-17T21:31:03  *** kristapsk has quit IRC
833 2020-09-17T21:32:12  <jonatack> i'm fairly confident with respect to PR 19845. will move on to proper review of 19954.
834 2020-09-17T21:34:51  *** Aden_ has quit IRC
835 2020-09-17T21:35:49  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
836 2020-09-17T21:36:13  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
837 2020-09-17T21:36:55  *** rc_423 has quit IRC
838 2020-09-17T21:37:22  *** rc_423 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
839 2020-09-17T21:38:23  *** kristapsk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
840 2020-09-17T21:47:55  *** mrostecki_ has quit IRC
841 2020-09-17T22:04:56  *** rc_423 has quit IRC
842 2020-09-17T22:05:21  *** rc_423 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
843 2020-09-17T22:10:23  *** vasild has quit IRC
844 2020-09-17T22:11:54  *** vasild has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
845 2020-09-17T22:12:59  *** davec has quit IRC
846 2020-09-17T22:14:43  *** Bullitje has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
847 2020-09-17T22:17:39  *** Bullitje_enable has quit IRC
848 2020-09-17T22:25:19  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
849 2020-09-17T22:27:47  *** marcoagner has quit IRC
850 2020-09-17T22:38:58  <aj> hm, would it be crazy to allow - and/or _ in config options the same way gmail allows . in addresses? ie just treat -signet-challenge and -signetchallenge (and -s-i-g-n-e-t-c-h-a-l-l-e-n-g-e) as aliases? i find squeezecase a pain to read
851 2020-09-17T22:39:41  * sipa suggests: spaces
852 2020-09-17T22:40:44  <sipa> ./src/bitcoind "-signet challenge=51"
853 2020-09-17T22:41:11  <sipa> aj: we already allow - and -- for everything, i think
854 2020-09-17T22:45:19  *** sr_gi has quit IRC
855 2020-09-17T22:45:47  *** sr_gi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
856 2020-09-17T22:46:37  *** promag has quit IRC
857 2020-09-17T22:48:19  <luke-jr> aj: might be exploitable
858 2020-09-17T22:48:41  <luke-jr> "just run the Fun Draw Transaction RPC"
859 2020-09-17T22:48:57  <luke-jr> (not command line, but there may be comparable cases now or in the future)
860 2020-09-17T22:49:18  <sipa> -fun roll loops
861 2020-09-17T22:50:10  *** Highway62 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
862 2020-09-17T22:52:25  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
863 2020-09-17T22:52:26  *** Highway62 is now known as Highway61
864 2020-09-17T22:53:44  <aj> luke-jr: you could do that exploit already
865 2020-09-17T22:54:20  <luke-jr> ?
866 2020-09-17T22:54:36  <luke-jr> oh, maybe, but it's a lot more problematic if you make it explicitly innocent
867 2020-09-17T22:54:39  <aj> luke-jr: "just run the Fun Draw Transaction RPC -fundrawtransaction"
868 2020-09-17T22:54:58  <luke-jr> -fun-draw-transaction is a lot more dangerous than -fundrawtransaction IMO
869 2020-09-17T22:57:58  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
870 2020-09-17T23:06:04  *** davec has quit IRC
871 2020-09-17T23:08:25  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
872 2020-09-17T23:39:09  *** mdunnio has quit IRC