doc: add rel note about potential CJDNS removal #36202

1. 
   fanquake commented at 9:06 AM on September 9, 2026: member

   Related to discussion in #36041.

2. fanquake added this to the milestone 32.0 on Sep 9, 2026
3. DrahtBot added the label Docs on Sep 9, 2026
4. 
   DrahtBot commented at 9:07 AM on September 9, 2026: contributor

   <!--e57a25ab6845829454e8d69fc972939a-->

   The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

   <!--006a51241073e994b41acfe9ec718e94-->

   Code Coverage & Benchmarks

   For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/36202.

   <!--021abf342d371248e50ceaed478a90ca-->

   Reviews

   See the guideline and AI policy for information on the review process.

   Type	Reviewers
   ACK	mzumsande, willcl-ark, achow101

   If your review is incorrectly listed, please copy-paste <code>&lt;!--meta-tag:bot-skip--&gt;</code> into the comment that the bot should ignore.

   <!--5faf32d7da4f0f540f40219e4f7537a3-->

5. fanquake force-pushed on Sep 9, 2026
6. DrahtBot added the label CI failed on Sep 9, 2026
7. doc: add rel note about potential CJDNS removal d6a2341632
8. fanquake force-pushed on Sep 9, 2026
9. DrahtBot removed the label CI failed on Sep 9, 2026
10. sedited requested review from mzumsande on Sep 9, 2026
11. 
    willcl-ark commented at 3:58 PM on September 9, 2026: member

    Concept ACK

    It's very concise; do we want to push readers to #36041, or provide them with a few more details here? If the latter we could mention that there is only 22 known reached nodes, and only 7 of those are "good" (have good uptime and are regularly accepting connections).

    Could be nice to clarify just how low the level support for this network (unfortunately) is...

12. 
    fanquake commented at 4:02 PM on September 9, 2026: member

    I don't really want to flesh out the entire note here. The point was just to get something place-holded, so it doesn't get forgotten, and we can hash out the details on the (release notes) wiki.

13. in doc/release-notes-36202.md:11 in d6a2341632

       6 | +Since its introduction in v23.0, it has not gained
       7 | +substantial adoption amongst nodes, and there is some
       8 | +concern about supporting a network with such a low number
       9 | +of peers.
      10 | +
      11 | +The CJDNS documentation was updated in #34811 to simplify
    

    ---

    ---

    

    mzumsande commented at 4:26 PM on September 9, 2026:

    Maybe "CJDNS changed its peer discovery so that setup no longer requires manual steps; the documentation was updated accordingly in #34811." so that it becomes clear that it's genuinely easier now, not just a doc change on our side. (Can also be changed later in the wiki).

    ---

    

    jonatack commented at 8:29 PM on September 9, 2026:

    @mzumsande agree, this would have been a better note, assuming the goal is to help, not hinder, adoption.

14. 
    mzumsande commented at 4:26 PM on September 9, 2026: contributor

    ACK d6a2341

15. DrahtBot requested review from willcl-ark on Sep 9, 2026
16. willcl-ark approved
17. 
    willcl-ark commented at 4:34 PM on September 9, 2026: member

    ACK d6a2341632a045f880693b7df60bd135f0c72e82

18. 
    achow101 commented at 7:58 PM on September 9, 2026: member

    ACK d6a2341632a045f880693b7df60bd135f0c72e82

19. achow101 merged this on Sep 9, 2026
20. achow101 closed this on Sep 9, 2026

    ---

21. in doc/release-notes-36202.md:9 in d6a2341632

       0 | @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
       1 | +Net
       2 | +---
       3 | +
       4 | +The project is currently considering whether to
       5 | +drop support for CJDNS (see discussion in #36041).
       6 | +Since its introduction in v23.0, it has not gained
       7 | +substantial adoption amongst nodes, and there is some
       8 | +concern about supporting a network with such a low number
       9 | +of peers.
    

    ---

    ---

    

    jonatack commented at 8:31 PM on September 9, 2026:

    I would submit that the current number of peerso is a misleading and somewhat irrelevant metric (see #36041 (comment).

22. 
    jonatack commented at 8:41 PM on September 9, 2026: member

    I would submit that discouraging adoption of this network (and the idea of removing support) when awareness of its updated ease of use is still low and was not yet described in a release note here, and given the value of the optionality it brings, might be premature (and perhaps unwise).

    It makes sense to discourage/warn/remove only if it is considered not to provide value even if more widely adopted -- which is a different discussion.

Contributors

fanquakeDrahtBotwillcl-arkmzumsandejonatackachow101

Milestone
32.0