@TheBlueMatt I tried to draft something to reflect the p2p banning behavior being properly implemented by signaling the version bump, how does this look to you?
In particular, do you think the first SHOULD NOT I added (regarding not banning peers for an invalid compact block) should be a MUST NOT?
I might prefer pointing out that nodes SHOULD NOT relay prior to validating unless their peer has sufficient version as well.
On November 3, 2016 8:37:12 AM EDT, Suhas Daftuar notifications@github.com wrote:
@TheBlueMatt I tried to draft something to reflect the p2p banning behavior being properly implemented by signaling the version bump, how does this look to you?
In particular, do you think the first SHOULD NOT I added (regarding not banning peers for an invalid compact block) should be a MUST NOT? You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
-- Commit Summary --
- [BIP 152] Fix invalid link
- [BIP 152] Bump p2p protocol for proper banning behavior
-- File Changes --
M bip-0152.mediawiki (4)
-- Patch Links --
You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #473
Makes sense, updated.
ACK
On November 3, 2016 8:37:12 AM EDT, Suhas Daftuar notifications@github.com wrote:
@TheBlueMatt I tried to draft something to reflect the p2p banning behavior being properly implemented by signaling the version bump, how does this look to you?
In particular, do you think the first SHOULD NOT I added (regarding not banning peers for an invalid compact block) should be a MUST NOT? You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
-- Commit Summary --
- [BIP 152] Fix invalid link
- [BIP 152] Bump p2p protocol for proper banning behavior
-- File Changes --
M bip-0152.mediawiki (4)
-- Patch Links --
You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #473