If we find a better way to implement reject unrequested transactions in a backward compatible fashion, I’ll withdraw it.
ML post: https://groups.google.com/g/bitcoindev/c/nWUcXBQbLGU Bitcoin Core conceptual discussion: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30572
Re-opening there is tx-relay work-in-progress available here: https://bitcoinbackbone.org/.
Open comments on #1663 have been fixed.
By the way I have a question about the BIPs, and not sure where to ask.
I’m on re-implementing BIP324 in backbone and in my humble opinion there are some sections that could be more well-defined or clarified not only in pseudo-code (e.g around FSChaCha20Poly1305 and FSChaCha20), i.e adding precise typing, use more strict cryptographic vocabulary sometimes, etc.
When I have a list of erratas and suggestions ready to submit, what should be the process, like I’m opening a pull request for review ? There are not technical changes per se, more clarifying the vocabulary for re-implementators and ease the work there. cc @jonatack @murchandamus
Hi @ariard, yes, open a pull request to this repository.
Okay not forgetting that. Shared more code on my BIP324 implementation in Backbone yesterday (https://bitcoinbackbone.org/ — commit 378dcb7590) Next development cycle is more focus on the transaction-relay stack in Backbone. So I’ll update that BIP proposal in consequence when it’s ready, soon.