1 2016-01-28T00:00:12 *** zzyzx is now known as Guest94951
2 2016-01-28T00:05:21 *** JackH has quit IRC
3 2016-01-28T00:05:43 *** jayd3e has joined #bitcoin-dev
4 2016-01-28T00:06:08 *** oleganza has quit IRC
5 2016-01-28T00:06:48 *** oleganza has joined #bitcoin-dev
6 2016-01-28T00:07:05 *** Dizzle has quit IRC
7 2016-01-28T00:08:38 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
8 2016-01-28T00:11:15 *** oleganza has quit IRC
9 2016-01-28T00:14:40 *** jayd3e has quit IRC
10 2016-01-28T00:15:10 *** sausage_factory has joined #bitcoin-dev
11 2016-01-28T00:17:00 *** blackwraith has quit IRC
12 2016-01-28T00:19:38 *** Guest94951 has quit IRC
13 2016-01-28T00:20:09 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
14 2016-01-28T00:20:12 *** Altoidnerd1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
15 2016-01-28T00:21:24 *** t7 has quit IRC
16 2016-01-28T00:21:38 *** Altoidnerd1 has quit IRC
17 2016-01-28T00:21:45 *** roidster has joined #bitcoin-dev
18 2016-01-28T00:21:58 *** roidster is now known as Guest22421
19 2016-01-28T00:24:05 *** brson has quit IRC
20 2016-01-28T00:26:46 *** horlicks_ has quit IRC
21 2016-01-28T00:27:13 *** Guest22421 is now known as roidster
22 2016-01-28T00:27:34 *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-dev
23 2016-01-28T00:28:09 *** buZz has quit IRC
24 2016-01-28T00:28:19 *** horlicks_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
25 2016-01-28T00:28:42 *** buZz has joined #bitcoin-dev
26 2016-01-28T00:29:04 *** tachys has quit IRC
27 2016-01-28T00:29:07 *** buZz is now known as Guest81059
28 2016-01-28T00:29:25 *** CheckDavid has quit IRC
29 2016-01-28T00:29:39 *** brson has joined #bitcoin-dev
30 2016-01-28T00:29:46 *** Guest81059 is now known as buZz
31 2016-01-28T00:31:07 *** aspect___ has quit IRC
32 2016-01-28T00:31:48 *** Altoidnerd1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
33 2016-01-28T00:31:51 *** Altoidnerd1 has left #bitcoin-dev
34 2016-01-28T00:32:25 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
35 2016-01-28T00:33:09 *** horlicks_ has quit IRC
36 2016-01-28T00:33:41 *** horlicks has joined #bitcoin-dev
37 2016-01-28T00:35:55 *** MKCoin has quit IRC
38 2016-01-28T00:37:49 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
39 2016-01-28T00:37:58 *** Guest68529 is now known as starsoccer
40 2016-01-28T00:37:58 *** starsoccer has joined #bitcoin-dev
41 2016-01-28T00:38:07 *** horlicks has quit IRC
42 2016-01-28T00:38:33 *** blueness has quit IRC
43 2016-01-28T00:39:26 *** d_rebel_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
44 2016-01-28T00:40:54 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
45 2016-01-28T00:41:27 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
46 2016-01-28T00:41:33 *** blueness has joined #bitcoin-dev
47 2016-01-28T00:41:48 *** d_rebel_ has quit IRC
48 2016-01-28T00:44:09 *** tachys has joined #bitcoin-dev
49 2016-01-28T00:44:11 *** horlicks_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
50 2016-01-28T00:45:35 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
51 2016-01-28T00:47:57 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
52 2016-01-28T00:48:35 *** tachys has quit IRC
53 2016-01-28T00:48:39 <stevenroose> github down, wtf
54 2016-01-28T00:48:58 <mrkent> stevenroose: been for a while. super annyoing
55 2016-01-28T00:49:14 <bsm1175321> #decentralizegithub
56 2016-01-28T00:49:22 <bsm1175321> Come on, you don't have your git repos on ipfs yet?
57 2016-01-28T00:49:23 <stevenroose> A decentralized github would be so awesome
58 2016-01-28T00:49:26 <stevenroose> And is so possible
59 2016-01-28T00:49:31 <gmaxwell> you could take the hub part out.
60 2016-01-28T00:49:33 <stevenroose> Bitcoin should be the first to adopt it
61 2016-01-28T00:49:35 <gmaxwell> you might call it 'git'
62 2016-01-28T00:49:41 *** MKCoin has joined #bitcoin-dev
63 2016-01-28T00:49:43 <mrkent> hahahha
64 2016-01-28T00:49:45 <mrkent> word
65 2016-01-28T00:49:48 <bsm1175321> ;-)
66 2016-01-28T00:50:39 <stevenroose> gmaxwell, it should have a repo for issues and the ability to have an official branch with multisig support f.e.
67 2016-01-28T00:50:47 <stevenroose> Would even be better than what GH provides today
68 2016-01-28T00:51:10 <stevenroose> git is quite decentralized, sadly it is not used like that (anymore)
69 2016-01-28T00:51:18 <bsm1175321> In case anyone really wants to debate forking yourself further and you're in NYC: http://www.meetup.com/BitDevsNYC/events/228376890/
70 2016-01-28T00:51:52 <gmaxwell> stevenroose: it's used 'like that' by lots of parties.
71 2016-01-28T00:53:23 <stevenroose> gmaxwell, yes?
72 2016-01-28T00:53:37 *** atgreen has joined #bitcoin-dev
73 2016-01-28T00:54:12 *** moa has joined #bitcoin-dev
74 2016-01-28T00:54:46 <mrkent> @bsm1175321: I have a question for the "Classic crowd": What do we do when 2MB blocks start filling up?
75 2016-01-28T00:55:36 <gmaxwell> stevenroose: in any case, AFAIK most people working on bitcoin have their git set to locally fetch all pull requests; so with it down we only lose issues and comments. (really annoying that these things themselves aren't locally pullable)
76 2016-01-28T00:55:43 <bsm1175321> More forks. All forks, all the time. Fork everyone else.
77 2016-01-28T00:56:30 <bsm1175321> mrkent: There is no answer. Bumping the block size is not a solution to the problem, only a stop-gap measure to a more carefully considered solution. I don't think you'll hear that from the classic camp though.
78 2016-01-28T00:57:09 *** DougieBot5000 has quit IRC
79 2016-01-28T00:57:58 <mrkent> Right... Why isn't a list of questions for Classic to consider on reddit everyday?
80 2016-01-28T00:58:06 *** DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-dev
81 2016-01-28T00:58:13 *** liszt has quit IRC
82 2016-01-28T00:58:55 <bsm1175321> mrkent: I am very tired of this debate. I'm working on a better long-term solution. If you really want to know what I think, it's here. http://blog.sldx.com/go-fork-yourself-more-bitcoin-transactions/
83 2016-01-28T00:59:07 <bsm1175321> I don't read reddit because it's a forking cesspool.
84 2016-01-28T00:59:43 <bsm1175321> We're hosting this "discussion" but I'm not leading or moderating it, I'm leaving it to some of my very level-headed co-organizers. We hope to keep it civil and on point.
85 2016-01-28T01:00:12 *** bit2017 has quit IRC
86 2016-01-28T01:01:32 *** roidster is now known as zzyzx
87 2016-01-28T01:02:02 *** zzyzx is now known as Guest80309
88 2016-01-28T01:02:11 *** Guest80309 is now known as roidster
89 2016-01-28T01:06:27 *** atgreen has quit IRC
90 2016-01-28T01:06:52 *** atgreen has joined #bitcoin-dev
91 2016-01-28T01:07:20 *** paci has joined #bitcoin-dev
92 2016-01-28T01:10:23 *** tjader has quit IRC
93 2016-01-28T01:12:31 *** BurritoBazooka has quit IRC
94 2016-01-28T01:13:02 *** Burrito has joined #bitcoin-dev
95 2016-01-28T01:14:21 <mrkent> @bsm1175321: good read
96 2016-01-28T01:14:37 <bsm1175321> thanks!
97 2016-01-28T01:15:46 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
98 2016-01-28T01:18:01 *** CheckDavid has joined #bitcoin-dev
99 2016-01-28T01:18:03 <mrkent> if i understand correctly, weak or extension blocks can use similar mechanism as segwit?
100 2016-01-28T01:18:12 <bsm1175321> Yes they can
101 2016-01-28T01:18:58 <bsm1175321> The segwit address mechanism is kind of like saying "the data to validate this is over --->> here" Which could be an extension block, a witness, or something more elaborate like a braid.
102 2016-01-28T01:19:13 <gmaxwell> ...
103 2016-01-28T01:19:18 <gmaxwell> That isn't correct.
104 2016-01-28T01:19:21 <bsm1175321> Ok
105 2016-01-28T01:19:50 *** jposner has joined #bitcoin-dev
106 2016-01-28T01:19:50 <gmaxwell> mrkent: you're asking about rather orthorgonal things.
107 2016-01-28T01:20:44 <gmaxwell> Weak blocks are a family of techniques where miners come to some kind of (loose) agreement on what the next blocks will contain, in advance of finding them, in order to make block propagation fast. It's something miners can do that is more or less invisible to non miners.
108 2016-01-28T01:21:54 <gmaxwell> mrkent: extension blocks are effectively a two-way-peg but into the same blockchain, rather than a side chain. They're almost precisely equal to a blocksize increase except with better backwards compatiblity.
109 2016-01-28T01:22:30 <gmaxwell> segwitness is only optimizing witness data (signatures, fraudproofs, etc.) -- so the tracking of the set of spendable coins is unchanged.
110 2016-01-28T01:24:41 <kanzure> i do not believe the default git configuration fetches all of the github-posted pull requests, which are sourced from other remote branches on remote repositories. if there's a way to switch this, i would appreciate hearing.
111 2016-01-28T01:24:45 <mrkent> I see. Weak block and extension blocks can be effectively be implemented together right?
112 2016-01-28T01:25:21 <gmaxwell> mrkent: in the sense that most unrelated things could be implemented togeather. Yes.
113 2016-01-28T01:25:34 <gmaxwell> I don't believe anyone working on the bitcoin software finds extension blocks interesting.
114 2016-01-28T01:25:44 <gmaxwell> at least not currently.
115 2016-01-28T01:26:57 <mrkent> gmaxwell: why not?
116 2016-01-28T01:27:01 <bsm1175321> gmaxwell: Given core's lack of a serious proposal for capacity increases, I proposed extension blocks for that purpose in my above blog post.
117 2016-01-28T01:27:30 <bsm1175321> I think a strict extension block would be a bad idea, it's better to evaluate some of the more advanced proposals like subchains/braids/NG.
118 2016-01-28T01:28:37 <gmaxwell> mrkent: because they carry virtually every negative consequence of a blocksize increase.
119 2016-01-28T01:29:03 <kanzure> bsm1175321: the origin of extension blocks is mostly from heavily-involved-core-related contributors or peoples... i'm not sure it's safe to say that core never thought about extension blocks.
120 2016-01-28T01:29:37 <mrkent> minus a hardfork, which arguably is the worst consequence of blocksize increase
121 2016-01-28T01:29:37 <TD-Linux> kanzure, pull requests are metadata outside of git, so there is no way for git itself to see them
122 2016-01-28T01:29:39 <gmaxwell> bsm1175321: Core has a published capacity roadmap. I find your "lack of a serious proposal" to be highly disrespectful.
123 2016-01-28T01:29:53 *** jposner has quit IRC
124 2016-01-28T01:30:10 <bsm1175321> gmaxwell: That proposal does not contain an actual proposal.
125 2016-01-28T01:30:15 <kanzure> TD-Linux: actually i believe github silently copies over all pull-request-related branches into the current repository into a specific namespace, like "_____{xyz}", but yea by default github does not serve up those branches when you run "git fetch".
126 2016-01-28T01:30:25 *** blueness has quit IRC
127 2016-01-28T01:31:02 *** jposner has joined #bitcoin-dev
128 2016-01-28T01:31:34 <bsm1175321> kanzure: I'm not saying that. But I think there is a perception that core is opposed to capacity increases. I just wanted to point out that there exists a soft-fork capacity extension mechanism, to smooth some ruffled feathers by those joining the classic camp...
129 2016-01-28T01:31:46 <gmaxwell> bsm1175321: I'm disappointed that you think it's appropriate to effectively call me a liar to my face.
130 2016-01-28T01:31:47 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
131 2016-01-28T01:32:13 <kanzure> this conversation just got really confusing. is bsm1175321 unaware of the capacity increases plans?
132 2016-01-28T01:32:20 <brg444> "opposed to a capacity increase"?
133 2016-01-28T01:32:22 <kanzure> but why does he know about segwit?
134 2016-01-28T01:32:55 <bsm1175321> Those are: segwit (which as a capacity increase is poor), plus Lightning.
135 2016-01-28T01:33:07 <bsm1175321> What have I missed?
136 2016-01-28T01:33:09 <moli> lol he's been advertising his "braids" or something that seems very confusing
137 2016-01-28T01:33:14 <kanzure> bsm1175321: you have missed almost everything :)
138 2016-01-28T01:33:24 <bsm1175321> gmaxwell: By no means do I intend to call you a liar.
139 2016-01-28T01:33:32 <gmaxwell> bsm1175321: It appears you haven't read the document; but moreover; the "classic" advocates are calling for something which capacity awful close to segwitness.
140 2016-01-28T01:34:12 <gmaxwell> And their complaint about segwit is that it's 'complex'-- an argument that you've not addressed with calling for extension blocks.
141 2016-01-28T01:34:18 <mrkent> I think the capacity increase bsm1175321 is talking about a blocksize increase. The roadmap offers many things that can make a blocksize increase easier to do.
142 2016-01-28T01:34:31 *** Guest99986 is now known as maaku
143 2016-01-28T01:34:46 <kanzure> mrkent: that's not true; he wouldn't be talking about extension blocks. but he is.
144 2016-01-28T01:34:51 <bsm1175321> mrkent: exactly. I'd say "safer".
145 2016-01-28T01:36:39 <bsm1175321> I really don't think I missed anything. But please correct me if I'm wrong.
146 2016-01-28T01:36:54 <MrHodl> Non consensus hardfork is safer?
147 2016-01-28T01:37:01 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
148 2016-01-28T01:37:09 <brg444> The part where hardforks are not safer under current conditions.
149 2016-01-28T01:37:58 <gmaxwell> he's arguing that an extension block is safer; and it is against safty considerations that basically no one is currently rasing. (except luke perhaps)
150 2016-01-28T01:38:03 <maaku> kanzure TD-Linux : you can configure your own git repo such that 'git fetch' retrieves pull requests too
151 2016-01-28T01:38:08 <kanzure> bsm1175321: how about the part about everything that wasn't segwit or lightning?
152 2016-01-28T01:38:21 <kanzure> bsm1175321: weak blocks, iblt, etc. this is silly. go read the document.
153 2016-01-28T01:38:27 <kanzure> flexcap?
154 2016-01-28T01:38:29 <bsm1175321> kanzure: weak blocks are not a capacity nicrease.
155 2016-01-28T01:38:37 <bsm1175321> They are orphan mitigation
156 2016-01-28T01:38:39 <kanzure> aren't you a physicist?
157 2016-01-28T01:38:51 <kanzure> capacity is a dimensionless unit, you know...
158 2016-01-28T01:39:15 <TD-Linux> maaku, this is amazing, I've been wasting all my time until now adding remotes
159 2016-01-28T01:39:34 <mrkent> kanzure: the capacity (i think) we're talking about here is measured in bytes dude
160 2016-01-28T01:39:35 <kanzure> maaku: oh it's a github option?
161 2016-01-28T01:39:40 <maaku> kanzure: http://blogs.atlassian.com/2014/08/how-to-fetch-pull-requests/
162 2016-01-28T01:40:06 <maaku> kanzure: github exposes pulls on a particular remote/pr/xxx refspec
163 2016-01-28T01:40:24 <maaku> the default git configuration doesn't fetch this, but it's a one-line change to your .git/config file
164 2016-01-28T01:40:41 <kanzure> aha, "fetch = +refs/pull/*/head:refs/remotes/upstream/pr/*"
165 2016-01-28T01:40:53 <kanzure> maaku: gah i didn't know that prefix. i thought it was "_____{something}". geeze. interesting.
166 2016-01-28T01:42:19 <kanzure> i wonder if "fetch github -a" grabs those.
167 2016-01-28T01:43:02 <gmaxwell> I learned this trick from sipa.
168 2016-01-28T01:44:08 *** hsmiths has quit IRC
169 2016-01-28T01:44:15 <kanzure> i think github was originally doing this so that people could delete their repos after they submit a pull request but before the pull request was merged into the target repo
170 2016-01-28T01:45:20 *** jtoomim has quit IRC
171 2016-01-28T01:45:23 *** agricocb has joined #bitcoin-dev
172 2016-01-28T01:46:25 *** jtoomim has joined #bitcoin-dev
173 2016-01-28T01:46:56 * bsm1175321 reads gmaxwell's post (again). In your words I'm referring to bandwidth-based scaling increase.
174 2016-01-28T01:47:19 <bsm1175321> (obviously) I still don't think I'm missing anything.
175 2016-01-28T01:47:23 *** gmaxwell has left #bitcoin-dev
176 2016-01-28T01:47:47 *** ehappy has joined #bitcoin-dev
177 2016-01-28T01:47:49 <mrkent> "The actual effect of these technologies is unknown, but scaling now with a soft fork that has wide consensus allows us to obtain the immediate gains, test and measure the mid-term possibilities, and use that data to formulate long-term plans."
178 2016-01-28T01:48:21 <bsm1175321> What did I do to piss him off? I seriously have nothing but respect for the guy and appreciate his post...
179 2016-01-28T01:48:48 <TD-Linux> bsm117532, you could have said "I don't think the plan scales fast enough"
180 2016-01-28T01:48:56 *** clopez has quit IRC
181 2016-01-28T01:49:07 *** agricocb has quit IRC
182 2016-01-28T01:49:14 *** agricocb has joined #bitcoin-dev
183 2016-01-28T01:49:20 <bsm1175321> I don't think that. Others do. I only wanted to point out that there is a faster scaling soft-fork mechanism.
184 2016-01-28T01:49:35 <TD-Linux> bsm117532, right, but that's what you said
185 2016-01-28T01:49:38 <bsm1175321> I agree 100% with his post and I don't think we need a larger block size now.
186 2016-01-28T01:49:38 <mrkent> greg is probably just on the edge from >6 months of drama
187 2016-01-28T01:49:49 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
188 2016-01-28T01:49:51 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
189 2016-01-28T01:49:52 <maaku> bsm1175321: there is a complicated assortment of factors that cause bitcoin's capacity to be limited. each of them has to be addressed in order to safely raise a cap
190 2016-01-28T01:50:04 <maaku> bsm1175321: please read the faq and statements for more detail
191 2016-01-28T01:50:08 <kanzure> mrkent: perhaps he has deeper epistemic complaints about bsm1175321 and other behavior other than just "drama".
192 2016-01-28T01:50:09 <bsm1175321> I know. I've seen some of his reddit posts. The poor guy needs a vacation.
193 2016-01-28T01:50:22 <moa> git goes down ... flame warm erupts on dev IRC within minutes
194 2016-01-28T01:50:34 <TD-Linux> git still works perfectly fine :)
195 2016-01-28T01:50:35 <moa> idle hands are the devil's tools
196 2016-01-28T01:50:36 <kanzure> oh you guys were noticing github unicorns too?
197 2016-01-28T01:51:09 *** hsmiths has joined #bitcoin-dev
198 2016-01-28T01:51:15 <bsm1175321> Apparently I pissed off gmaxwell at some point, dunno how or why. something to do with epistemology or something.
199 2016-01-28T01:51:37 <TD-Linux> bsm117532, for future reference I will tell you why: <bsm1175321> gmaxwell: That proposal does not contain an actual proposal.
200 2016-01-28T01:52:03 <kanzure> TD-Linux: that doesn't sound like "because drama" to me, heh
201 2016-01-28T01:52:08 *** clopez has joined #bitcoin-dev
202 2016-01-28T01:52:17 <bsm1175321> TD-Linux: Thanks. I should have worded that: "that proposal doesn't contain a proposal for *bandwith*based*increases* in capacity".
203 2016-01-28T01:52:47 <bsm1175321> word suck.
204 2016-01-28T01:52:49 <kanzure> i'm not sure that one is true either; smoothing out the bandwidth spikiness is an increase in capacity in at least some sort of dimension.
205 2016-01-28T01:52:51 <bsm1175321> *words
206 2016-01-28T01:52:51 <TD-Linux> bsm117532, but that would also be wrong because it has a nearly 2x bandwidth increase. but yes even that wording would be more respectful
207 2016-01-28T01:53:56 <TD-Linux> at least then you can discuss whether segwit would count as a bandwidth increase. but having a discussion around "is your proposal a proposal" is impossible.
208 2016-01-28T01:53:59 <maaku> bsm1175321: you are also confusing capacity (what the system is theoretically capable of supporting) with permitted scaling (what the system is artificially limited to support)
209 2016-01-28T01:54:41 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
210 2016-01-28T01:55:00 <bsm1175321> maaku: I think everyone is making that confusion. And you're referring to payment channels...which happen with or without a blocksize increase and are not enough.
211 2016-01-28T01:55:41 *** jnewshoes1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
212 2016-01-28T01:55:50 <brg444> It's a process, nothing on its own is enough. There's no magic solution.
213 2016-01-28T01:56:21 <brg444> All things that are addressed in the capacity roadmap.
214 2016-01-28T01:58:56 *** jnewshoes has quit IRC
215 2016-01-28T01:59:01 *** patcon has joined #bitcoin-dev
216 2016-01-28T01:59:23 <maaku> bsm1175321: no I am not referring to payment channels only
217 2016-01-28T01:59:53 <maaku> e.g. weak blocks could potentially spread out transaction transmission so as to allow more transactions per block
218 2016-01-28T01:59:59 <maaku> please read the faq and such
219 2016-01-28T02:00:14 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
220 2016-01-28T02:01:47 <bsm1175321> I have read the damn FAQ. Weak blocks are not a capacity increase. I don't understand why you're claiming they do.
221 2016-01-28T02:02:50 *** roidster has quit IRC
222 2016-01-28T02:02:51 <bsm1175321> Maybe a <10% increase by reducing the orphan rate. Is that what you mean?
223 2016-01-28T02:03:30 *** roidster has joined #bitcoin-dev
224 2016-01-28T02:03:40 *** roidster is now known as Guest48788
225 2016-01-28T02:04:51 *** rmwb has quit IRC
226 2016-01-28T02:04:57 *** Guest48788 is now known as roidster
227 2016-01-28T02:06:15 *** alpalp has joined #bitcoin-dev
228 2016-01-28T02:07:14 *** roidster is now known as zzyzx
229 2016-01-28T02:07:43 *** zzyzx is now known as Guest32012
230 2016-01-28T02:07:56 *** Guest32012 is now known as roidster
231 2016-01-28T02:10:59 *** roidster has quit IRC
232 2016-01-28T02:11:21 *** brson has quit IRC
233 2016-01-28T02:11:40 *** xiangfu has joined #bitcoin-dev
234 2016-01-28T02:13:52 *** belcher has quit IRC
235 2016-01-28T02:14:00 *** sausage_factory is now known as priidu
236 2016-01-28T02:16:32 *** jtimon has quit IRC
237 2016-01-28T02:16:46 *** patcon has quit IRC
238 2016-01-28T02:18:24 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
239 2016-01-28T02:19:18 *** patcon has joined #bitcoin-dev
240 2016-01-28T02:21:42 *** stapler117 has joined #bitcoin-dev
241 2016-01-28T02:30:07 *** brg444 has quit IRC
242 2016-01-28T02:31:12 *** markus-k_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
243 2016-01-28T02:34:11 *** markus-k has quit IRC
244 2016-01-28T02:35:26 *** moa has quit IRC
245 2016-01-28T02:35:58 *** Emcy_ has quit IRC
246 2016-01-28T02:37:26 *** moa has joined #bitcoin-dev
247 2016-01-28T02:37:56 *** patcon has quit IRC
248 2016-01-28T02:39:16 *** tjader has quit IRC
249 2016-01-28T02:39:19 <Luke-Jr> bsm1175321: weak blocks + IBLT reduce the size of the time-critical block data.
250 2016-01-28T02:40:41 *** stapler117 has quit IRC
251 2016-01-28T02:43:49 *** stapler117 has joined #bitcoin-dev
252 2016-01-28T02:43:53 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-dev
253 2016-01-28T02:45:23 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
254 2016-01-28T02:49:47 *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-dev
255 2016-01-28T02:49:48 *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-dev
256 2016-01-28T02:52:10 <bsm1175321> Luke-Jr: So they reduce the orphan rate, and through that is the only way they have any affect on transaction volume, no?
257 2016-01-28T02:53:07 <Luke-Jr> bsm1175321: stale rate*, which is a primary factor in what size blocks the network can handle
258 2016-01-28T02:53:30 <bsm1175321> terminology. Yes stale rate.
259 2016-01-28T02:56:05 *** RoboTedd_ has quit IRC
260 2016-01-28T02:56:20 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
261 2016-01-28T02:56:44 *** RoboTeddy has joined #bitcoin-dev
262 2016-01-28T02:57:04 *** RoboTeddy has joined #bitcoin-dev
263 2016-01-28T02:59:02 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, block switching time is the short term critical piece
264 2016-01-28T02:59:19 <phantomcircuit> long term the critical piece is initial block synchronization time
265 2016-01-28T03:00:09 *** sparetire has quit IRC
266 2016-01-28T03:00:43 <Luke-Jr> phantomcircuit: yes, but segwit probably helps that a lot
267 2016-01-28T03:00:44 *** mrkent has quit IRC
268 2016-01-28T03:04:13 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, it's a constant factor reduction in the rate of growth
269 2016-01-28T03:04:24 <Luke-Jr> phantomcircuit: ?
270 2016-01-28T03:04:27 <phantomcircuit> so medium term yes, long term no
271 2016-01-28T03:04:38 <Luke-Jr> phantomcircuit: it means everything more than ~a month ago, you only need to download half of it
272 2016-01-28T03:05:38 *** Altoidnerd1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
273 2016-01-28T03:05:43 *** Altoidnerd1 has left #bitcoin-dev
274 2016-01-28T03:05:45 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, uh
275 2016-01-28T03:05:49 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, no it doesn't
276 2016-01-28T03:06:07 <phantomcircuit> going forward that's true
277 2016-01-28T03:06:17 *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-dev
278 2016-01-28T03:06:19 <Luke-Jr> going forward is the non-constant..
279 2016-01-28T03:06:37 <bsm1175321> You guys get weak blocks implemented and the orphan rate will be <~ 1%. My braids will be a solution in need of a problem at that point. :-(
280 2016-01-28T03:07:20 <phantomcircuit> bsm1175321, i do not believe it's possible to improve relay in the face of an adversary
281 2016-01-28T03:07:33 <phantomcircuit> since by definition the adversary has the data and can simply not send you pieces
282 2016-01-28T03:07:57 <bsm1175321> True.
283 2016-01-28T03:08:00 *** job_ has quit IRC
284 2016-01-28T03:08:11 <bsm1175321> So you're saying all miners will be willing to receive weak blocks from others, but unwilling to publish them?
285 2016-01-28T03:08:46 <phantomcircuit> bsm1175321, only if they are executing some form of attack
286 2016-01-28T03:09:02 <phantomcircuit> what makes all of this dangerous is that the system will appear to be far more secure than it is
287 2016-01-28T03:09:59 <bsm1175321> How so?
288 2016-01-28T03:12:00 <phantomcircuit> bsm1175321, "stale block rate is only 0.1%, wow amazing! blocks can be 20MB now!" except actually the moment a miner runs a selfish mining attack the stale rate would explode to >20% for other pools
289 2016-01-28T03:12:31 <bsm1175321> Interesting argument.
290 2016-01-28T03:15:17 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
291 2016-01-28T03:15:33 *** rawdr has quit IRC
292 2016-01-28T03:16:57 *** rawdr has joined #bitcoin-dev
293 2016-01-28T03:19:02 <phantomcircuit> bsm1175321, i have so far not had anybody make an even half reasonable argument that the position is wrong
294 2016-01-28T03:19:17 <bsm1175321> I would say you're right.
295 2016-01-28T03:20:44 <bsm1175321> Well as part of braids, it's necessary to move the coinbase reward to be past-looking. It's really the fact that blocks contain a payout, and can be relative orphans, that enables selfish mining to work. So I kill two birds with one stone there.
296 2016-01-28T03:21:54 <bsm1175321> It's the coinbase that forces the blocks to be relative double-spends. All other transactions could be identical. (And would be, with weak blocks)
297 2016-01-28T03:21:57 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
298 2016-01-28T03:25:24 *** mountaingoat has quit IRC
299 2016-01-28T03:25:30 <Luke-Jr> phantomcircuit: well, if nobody *tries* to break it, we're still ok
300 2016-01-28T03:25:33 <Luke-Jr> /s
301 2016-01-28T03:36:19 *** GAit has quit IRC
302 2016-01-28T03:38:01 *** Delta_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
303 2016-01-28T03:39:25 *** MrHodl has quit IRC
304 2016-01-28T03:41:46 *** bityogi has quit IRC
305 2016-01-28T03:41:48 *** jtoomim_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
306 2016-01-28T03:41:55 *** Subo1977 has quit IRC
307 2016-01-28T03:42:28 *** mountaingoat has joined #bitcoin-dev
308 2016-01-28T03:42:36 *** xiangfu has quit IRC
309 2016-01-28T03:43:26 *** jtoomim has quit IRC
310 2016-01-28T03:47:32 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
311 2016-01-28T03:48:04 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
312 2016-01-28T03:50:50 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
313 2016-01-28T03:52:53 *** deadalnix has joined #bitcoin-dev
314 2016-01-28T03:53:20 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
315 2016-01-28T03:54:44 *** priidu has quit IRC
316 2016-01-28T03:55:04 *** jposner has quit IRC
317 2016-01-28T03:55:38 *** amincd has joined #bitcoin-dev
318 2016-01-28T03:55:54 *** amincd has left #bitcoin-dev
319 2016-01-28T03:56:12 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
320 2016-01-28T03:56:43 *** xiangfu has joined #bitcoin-dev
321 2016-01-28T03:59:43 *** patcon has joined #bitcoin-dev
322 2016-01-28T04:06:10 *** Prattler has quit IRC
323 2016-01-28T04:08:46 *** tjader has quit IRC
324 2016-01-28T04:13:07 *** Burrito has quit IRC
325 2016-01-28T04:13:32 *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
326 2016-01-28T04:14:36 *** p15 has joined #bitcoin-dev
327 2016-01-28T04:14:41 *** joecool has joined #bitcoin-dev
328 2016-01-28T04:16:01 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
329 2016-01-28T04:21:47 *** disco| is now known as dizko
330 2016-01-28T04:21:49 *** deadalni_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
331 2016-01-28T04:22:19 *** veggi3s has quit IRC
332 2016-01-28T04:24:08 *** YoY_ has quit IRC
333 2016-01-28T04:24:45 *** joecool has quit IRC
334 2016-01-28T04:25:14 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
335 2016-01-28T04:25:44 *** bit2017 has joined #bitcoin-dev
336 2016-01-28T04:26:06 *** deadalni_ has quit IRC
337 2016-01-28T04:28:37 *** rmwb has quit IRC
338 2016-01-28T04:28:46 *** patcon has quit IRC
339 2016-01-28T04:30:12 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
340 2016-01-28T04:31:11 *** YoY has joined #bitcoin-dev
341 2016-01-28T04:31:20 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-dev
342 2016-01-28T04:33:37 *** YoY has quit IRC
343 2016-01-28T04:35:27 *** patcon has joined #bitcoin-dev
344 2016-01-28T04:35:28 *** davec has quit IRC
345 2016-01-28T04:40:47 *** davec has joined #bitcoin-dev
346 2016-01-28T04:41:25 *** blueness has joined #bitcoin-dev
347 2016-01-28T04:44:46 *** veggi3s has joined #bitcoin-dev
348 2016-01-28T04:55:28 *** T23WS has joined #bitcoin-dev
349 2016-01-28T04:58:23 *** T23WS_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
350 2016-01-28T04:58:50 *** TheSeven has quit IRC
351 2016-01-28T05:00:18 *** TheSeven has joined #bitcoin-dev
352 2016-01-28T05:00:20 *** T23WS has quit IRC
353 2016-01-28T05:14:32 *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
354 2016-01-28T05:16:20 *** p15 has quit IRC
355 2016-01-28T05:17:11 *** xiangfu has quit IRC
356 2016-01-28T05:18:35 *** patcon has quit IRC
357 2016-01-28T05:19:31 *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-dev
358 2016-01-28T05:19:33 *** p15 has joined #bitcoin-dev
359 2016-01-28T05:19:49 *** patcon has joined #bitcoin-dev
360 2016-01-28T05:23:01 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
361 2016-01-28T05:23:44 *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
362 2016-01-28T05:26:11 *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-dev
363 2016-01-28T05:27:07 *** veggi3s has quit IRC
364 2016-01-28T05:32:55 *** veggi3s has joined #bitcoin-dev
365 2016-01-28T05:39:25 *** CheckDavid has quit IRC
366 2016-01-28T05:40:15 *** tjader has quit IRC
367 2016-01-28T05:40:54 *** metalcamp has joined #bitcoin-dev
368 2016-01-28T05:45:42 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
369 2016-01-28T05:52:11 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
370 2016-01-28T05:56:25 *** xiangfu has joined #bitcoin-dev
371 2016-01-28T05:56:35 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
372 2016-01-28T06:00:24 *** brooss_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
373 2016-01-28T06:02:02 *** brooss has quit IRC
374 2016-01-28T06:04:50 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
375 2016-01-28T06:05:06 *** patcon has quit IRC
376 2016-01-28T06:09:03 *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-dev
377 2016-01-28T06:11:50 *** arowser has quit IRC
378 2016-01-28T06:12:03 *** deadalnix has joined #bitcoin-dev
379 2016-01-28T06:12:08 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-dev
380 2016-01-28T06:13:34 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
381 2016-01-28T06:14:41 *** ongolaBoy has joined #bitcoin-dev
382 2016-01-28T06:16:58 *** arichnad has quit IRC
383 2016-01-28T06:18:12 *** jposner has joined #bitcoin-dev
384 2016-01-28T06:18:15 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
385 2016-01-28T06:24:56 *** Prattler has joined #bitcoin-dev
386 2016-01-28T06:30:26 *** blkdb has quit IRC
387 2016-01-28T06:32:15 *** xiangfu has quit IRC
388 2016-01-28T06:33:18 *** goregrind has joined #bitcoin-dev
389 2016-01-28T06:38:36 *** rmwb has quit IRC
390 2016-01-28T06:38:56 *** blueness has quit IRC
391 2016-01-28T06:39:38 *** blueness_ has quit IRC
392 2016-01-28T06:41:02 *** jposner has quit IRC
393 2016-01-28T06:44:22 *** blueness_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
394 2016-01-28T06:45:53 *** blueness has joined #bitcoin-dev
395 2016-01-28T06:48:16 *** blkdb has joined #bitcoin-dev
396 2016-01-28T06:48:54 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-dev
397 2016-01-28T06:53:32 *** gavink has quit IRC
398 2016-01-28T06:53:55 *** azm1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
399 2016-01-28T06:55:53 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-dev
400 2016-01-28T06:56:29 *** neozaru has joined #bitcoin-dev
401 2016-01-28T06:57:40 *** priidu has joined #bitcoin-dev
402 2016-01-28T07:00:18 *** blueness has quit IRC
403 2016-01-28T07:00:30 *** blueness_ has quit IRC
404 2016-01-28T07:03:02 *** blueness_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
405 2016-01-28T07:03:32 *** blueness has joined #bitcoin-dev
406 2016-01-28T07:05:00 *** ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-dev
407 2016-01-28T07:05:20 *** gavink has joined #bitcoin-dev
408 2016-01-28T07:09:30 *** tjader has quit IRC
409 2016-01-28T07:15:15 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
410 2016-01-28T07:38:07 *** Dizzle has quit IRC
411 2016-01-28T07:38:36 *** azm1 has quit IRC
412 2016-01-28T07:39:11 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
413 2016-01-28T07:39:13 *** mrkent has quit IRC
414 2016-01-28T07:39:50 *** DougieBot5000 has quit IRC
415 2016-01-28T07:40:05 *** robink_ is now known as robink
416 2016-01-28T07:41:47 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-dev
417 2016-01-28T07:43:48 *** rmwb has quit IRC
418 2016-01-28T07:45:03 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-dev
419 2016-01-28T07:45:09 *** benrcole has joined #bitcoin-dev
420 2016-01-28T07:47:56 *** melvster has quit IRC
421 2016-01-28T07:52:40 *** jay01684 has joined #bitcoin-dev
422 2016-01-28T07:53:13 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
423 2016-01-28T07:53:50 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-dev
424 2016-01-28T07:54:26 *** neozaru has quit IRC
425 2016-01-28T07:54:26 *** kadoban has quit IRC
426 2016-01-28T07:55:15 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
427 2016-01-28T07:55:24 *** neozaru has joined #bitcoin-dev
428 2016-01-28T07:57:26 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
429 2016-01-28T07:58:24 *** ThomasV has quit IRC
430 2016-01-28T08:00:27 *** neozaru has quit IRC
431 2016-01-28T08:01:28 *** neozaru has joined #bitcoin-dev
432 2016-01-28T08:01:47 *** melvster has joined #bitcoin-dev
433 2016-01-28T08:03:55 *** xiangfu has joined #bitcoin-dev
434 2016-01-28T08:08:39 *** neozaru has quit IRC
435 2016-01-28T08:09:45 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
436 2016-01-28T08:11:20 *** shorena has joined #bitcoin-dev
437 2016-01-28T08:13:52 *** Grouver has joined #bitcoin-dev
438 2016-01-28T08:14:44 *** rmwb has quit IRC
439 2016-01-28T08:19:26 *** supasonic has quit IRC
440 2016-01-28T08:19:27 *** buZz has quit IRC
441 2016-01-28T08:20:08 *** buZz has joined #bitcoin-dev
442 2016-01-28T08:20:30 *** supasonic has joined #bitcoin-dev
443 2016-01-28T08:20:32 *** buZz is now known as Guest31470
444 2016-01-28T08:21:14 *** Guest31470 is now known as buZz
445 2016-01-28T08:25:26 *** CodesInChaos has quit IRC
446 2016-01-28T08:30:04 *** mountaingoat has quit IRC
447 2016-01-28T08:32:06 *** arichnad has joined #bitcoin-dev
448 2016-01-28T08:40:04 *** BashCo has quit IRC
449 2016-01-28T08:40:10 *** CodesInChaos has joined #bitcoin-dev
450 2016-01-28T08:41:15 *** tjader has quit IRC
451 2016-01-28T08:42:39 *** benrcole has joined #bitcoin-dev
452 2016-01-28T08:43:41 *** mountaingoat has joined #bitcoin-dev
453 2016-01-28T08:45:00 *** blur3d has joined #bitcoin-dev
454 2016-01-28T08:46:23 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
455 2016-01-28T08:48:27 *** IAmNotDorian has joined #bitcoin-dev
456 2016-01-28T08:48:28 *** IAmNotDorian has joined #bitcoin-dev
457 2016-01-28T08:53:53 *** ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-dev
458 2016-01-28T09:01:35 *** xiangfu has quit IRC
459 2016-01-28T09:01:50 *** xiangfu has joined #bitcoin-dev
460 2016-01-28T09:02:29 *** n0n0 has joined #bitcoin-dev
461 2016-01-28T09:04:44 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
462 2016-01-28T09:05:09 *** e4xit has quit IRC
463 2016-01-28T09:06:53 *** oleganza has joined #bitcoin-dev
464 2016-01-28T09:09:21 *** ozanyurt has joined #bitcoin-dev
465 2016-01-28T09:11:35 *** ThomasV has quit IRC
466 2016-01-28T09:11:41 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
467 2016-01-28T09:15:43 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-dev
468 2016-01-28T09:16:36 *** rmwb has quit IRC
469 2016-01-28T09:17:02 *** T23WS has joined #bitcoin-dev
470 2016-01-28T09:17:23 *** drazisil has quit IRC
471 2016-01-28T09:17:35 *** one_zero has quit IRC
472 2016-01-28T09:18:03 *** T23WS_ has quit IRC
473 2016-01-28T09:19:21 *** rubensayshi has joined #bitcoin-dev
474 2016-01-28T09:20:55 *** drazisil has joined #bitcoin-dev
475 2016-01-28T09:21:52 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-dev
476 2016-01-28T09:25:16 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
477 2016-01-28T09:35:00 <thermoman> wumpus: thanks
478 2016-01-28T09:36:16 *** mrkent has quit IRC
479 2016-01-28T09:36:43 *** Altoidnerd1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
480 2016-01-28T09:37:11 *** OxADADA has quit IRC
481 2016-01-28T09:37:23 *** OxADADA has joined #bitcoin-dev
482 2016-01-28T09:50:14 *** hsmiths has quit IRC
483 2016-01-28T09:50:34 *** RoboTeddy has quit IRC
484 2016-01-28T09:51:15 *** RoboTeddy has joined #bitcoin-dev
485 2016-01-28T09:52:01 *** c-cex-yuriy has joined #bitcoin-dev
486 2016-01-28T09:52:55 *** Guest1234 has quit IRC
487 2016-01-28T10:05:53 *** sparetire has joined #bitcoin-dev
488 2016-01-28T10:08:51 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-dev
489 2016-01-28T10:09:48 *** kylian has joined #bitcoin-dev
490 2016-01-28T10:10:26 *** tjader has quit IRC
491 2016-01-28T10:13:26 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
492 2016-01-28T10:16:29 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
493 2016-01-28T10:18:57 *** rmwb has quit IRC
494 2016-01-28T10:19:07 *** kylian has quit IRC
495 2016-01-28T10:22:26 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
496 2016-01-28T10:23:21 *** twixisowned has joined #bitcoin-dev
497 2016-01-28T10:24:14 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-dev
498 2016-01-28T10:24:35 *** veggi3s has quit IRC
499 2016-01-28T10:25:28 *** hmsimha_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
500 2016-01-28T10:26:55 *** trixisowned has quit IRC
501 2016-01-28T10:26:59 *** nodejunkie has joined #bitcoin-dev
502 2016-01-28T10:28:36 *** oleganza has quit IRC
503 2016-01-28T10:29:40 *** xiangfu has quit IRC
504 2016-01-28T10:39:52 *** oleganza has joined #bitcoin-dev
505 2016-01-28T10:41:17 *** hsmiths has joined #bitcoin-dev
506 2016-01-28T10:46:34 *** IAmNotDorian has quit IRC
507 2016-01-28T10:46:44 *** supasonic has quit IRC
508 2016-01-28T10:47:00 *** IAmNotDorian has joined #bitcoin-dev
509 2016-01-28T10:47:01 *** IAmNotDorian has joined #bitcoin-dev
510 2016-01-28T10:58:37 *** oleganza has quit IRC
511 2016-01-28T10:59:31 *** T23WS has quit IRC
512 2016-01-28T11:06:56 *** clopez has quit IRC
513 2016-01-28T11:08:48 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
514 2016-01-28T11:09:57 *** clopez has joined #bitcoin-dev
515 2016-01-28T11:10:15 *** GreenIsMyPepper has quit IRC
516 2016-01-28T11:11:01 *** GAit has quit IRC
517 2016-01-28T11:11:36 *** horlicks_ has quit IRC
518 2016-01-28T11:12:39 *** GreenIsMyPepper has joined #bitcoin-dev
519 2016-01-28T11:15:27 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
520 2016-01-28T11:16:54 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
521 2016-01-28T11:17:26 *** melvster has quit IRC
522 2016-01-28T11:18:22 *** markus-k has joined #bitcoin-dev
523 2016-01-28T11:18:31 *** mdemont has joined #bitcoin-dev
524 2016-01-28T11:18:59 *** GAit has quit IRC
525 2016-01-28T11:20:20 *** rmwb has quit IRC
526 2016-01-28T11:23:44 *** horlicks_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
527 2016-01-28T11:29:04 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
528 2016-01-28T11:30:41 *** melvster has joined #bitcoin-dev
529 2016-01-28T11:32:04 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
530 2016-01-28T11:33:31 <blur3d> To the Core Devs, Iâd just like to let you know that you guys are amazing. Keep on doing what you are doing. Ignore all the side channel trash, and just do what you do best. Great work on the improved communication, I think itâs a great start, and definately positive for the community. You guys are really working on some cutting edge stuff, and considering no one knows exactly where itâs going, you guys are on top of it.
531 2016-01-28T11:33:32 <blur3d> like losing a founder, if you were to move on, bitcoin would literally lose part of itâs soul. So thank you all :)
532 2016-01-28T11:33:48 *** horlicks_ has quit IRC
533 2016-01-28T11:34:16 <wumpus> thanks blur3d :)
534 2016-01-28T11:34:26 * jaromil seconds the good vibes :^)
535 2016-01-28T11:39:55 *** tjader has quit IRC
536 2016-01-28T11:40:47 *** horlicks has joined #bitcoin-dev
537 2016-01-28T11:40:56 *** GAit has quit IRC
538 2016-01-28T11:41:06 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
539 2016-01-28T11:42:38 *** IAmNotDorian has quit IRC
540 2016-01-28T11:42:58 *** MRW has quit IRC
541 2016-01-28T11:43:22 *** IAmNotDorian has joined #bitcoin-dev
542 2016-01-28T11:43:23 *** IAmNotDorian has joined #bitcoin-dev
543 2016-01-28T11:44:57 *** GAit has quit IRC
544 2016-01-28T11:45:26 *** rawdr has quit IRC
545 2016-01-28T11:45:30 *** horlicks has quit IRC
546 2016-01-28T11:45:36 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
547 2016-01-28T11:47:03 *** horlicks has joined #bitcoin-dev
548 2016-01-28T11:47:51 *** MRW has joined #bitcoin-dev
549 2016-01-28T11:48:16 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
550 2016-01-28T11:54:33 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
551 2016-01-28T11:58:46 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
552 2016-01-28T12:01:25 *** nodejunkie has quit IRC
553 2016-01-28T12:01:31 *** _yoy_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
554 2016-01-28T12:03:12 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
555 2016-01-28T12:09:19 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
556 2016-01-28T12:10:00 *** Altoidnerd1 has quit IRC
557 2016-01-28T12:11:38 *** drnet has joined #bitcoin-dev
558 2016-01-28T12:12:48 *** shorena has quit IRC
559 2016-01-28T12:12:52 *** blueness has quit IRC
560 2016-01-28T12:14:10 *** blueness has joined #bitcoin-dev
561 2016-01-28T12:16:34 *** Kexkey has joined #bitcoin-dev
562 2016-01-28T12:16:37 *** ignit has joined #bitcoin-dev
563 2016-01-28T12:16:46 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
564 2016-01-28T12:16:47 *** ItSANgo has quit IRC
565 2016-01-28T12:17:00 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
566 2016-01-28T12:17:15 *** trakinas has joined #bitcoin-dev
567 2016-01-28T12:21:52 *** ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-dev
568 2016-01-28T12:22:12 *** rmwb has quit IRC
569 2016-01-28T12:23:36 *** bit2017 has quit IRC
570 2016-01-28T12:24:56 *** ItSANgo has joined #bitcoin-dev
571 2016-01-28T12:27:47 *** rawdr has joined #bitcoin-dev
572 2016-01-28T12:29:13 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
573 2016-01-28T12:31:04 *** Kexkey has quit IRC
574 2016-01-28T12:32:00 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
575 2016-01-28T12:32:35 *** rawdr has quit IRC
576 2016-01-28T12:37:40 *** rawdr has joined #bitcoin-dev
577 2016-01-28T12:42:48 *** rawdr has quit IRC
578 2016-01-28T12:44:23 *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
579 2016-01-28T12:44:23 *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
580 2016-01-28T12:44:34 *** core__ has quit IRC
581 2016-01-28T12:45:18 *** drnet has quit IRC
582 2016-01-28T12:49:35 *** core__ has joined #bitcoin-dev
583 2016-01-28T12:55:04 *** rawdr has joined #bitcoin-dev
584 2016-01-28T12:55:22 *** cjcj has joined #bitcoin-dev
585 2016-01-28T13:00:19 *** moa has quit IRC
586 2016-01-28T13:03:36 *** blueness has quit IRC
587 2016-01-28T13:06:46 *** core__ has quit IRC
588 2016-01-28T13:07:21 *** CheckDavid has joined #bitcoin-dev
589 2016-01-28T13:10:00 *** tjader has quit IRC
590 2016-01-28T13:16:18 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
591 2016-01-28T13:16:55 *** natloz has joined #bitcoin-dev
592 2016-01-28T13:19:00 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
593 2016-01-28T13:21:44 *** shorena has joined #bitcoin-dev
594 2016-01-28T13:22:24 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-dev
595 2016-01-28T13:24:04 *** rmwb has quit IRC
596 2016-01-28T13:24:53 *** core__ has joined #bitcoin-dev
597 2016-01-28T13:25:48 *** Tulsene has quit IRC
598 2016-01-28T13:28:35 *** paci has quit IRC
599 2016-01-28T13:33:13 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-dev
600 2016-01-28T13:36:54 *** paci has joined #bitcoin-dev
601 2016-01-28T13:41:04 *** Palsson has joined #bitcoin-dev
602 2016-01-28T13:44:37 <priidu> what datatype does Bitcoin Core use to return the current network hashrate?
603 2016-01-28T13:44:47 <priidu> e.g. the "getnetworkhashps" command
604 2016-01-28T13:45:50 <priidu> if its an unsigned 64-bit integer, we're probably about 1/20 way there to it wrapping :P
605 2016-01-28T13:47:13 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-dev
606 2016-01-28T13:47:26 *** RBecker has quit IRC
607 2016-01-28T13:47:30 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
608 2016-01-28T13:48:29 *** RBecker has joined #bitcoin-dev
609 2016-01-28T13:48:30 *** natloz has quit IRC
610 2016-01-28T13:48:59 *** zibbo has joined #bitcoin-dev
611 2016-01-28T13:50:15 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
612 2016-01-28T13:50:42 *** StormDev has joined #bitcoin-dev
613 2016-01-28T13:51:11 <priidu> (more on this in #bitcoin, if it's a valid concern)
614 2016-01-28T13:52:17 <priidu> mostly a concern for interfacing software, though
615 2016-01-28T13:52:39 <priidu> for example, all the Java wrappers I've seen use "long" instead of "BigInteger" to hold the network hash rate
616 2016-01-28T13:55:37 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
617 2016-01-28T13:55:40 <priidu> in which case:
618 2016-01-28T13:55:42 <priidu> 9 223 372 036 854 775 807 (Long.MAX_VALUE)
619 2016-01-28T13:55:51 <priidu> 1 073 000 000 000 000 000 (Network hashrate a few days ago)
620 2016-01-28T13:57:11 *** Raziel has quit IRC
621 2016-01-28T13:58:48 *** clopez has quit IRC
622 2016-01-28T13:59:56 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
623 2016-01-28T14:07:08 *** blur3d has quit IRC
624 2016-01-28T14:07:49 *** clopez has joined #bitcoin-dev
625 2016-01-28T14:10:33 *** natloz has joined #bitcoin-dev
626 2016-01-28T14:14:14 <nibbler> priidu: hasrate is not reported by core
627 2016-01-28T14:15:18 *** natloz has quit IRC
628 2016-01-28T14:16:15 <nibbler> or is it?
629 2016-01-28T14:16:23 *** StormDev has quit IRC
630 2016-01-28T14:16:47 *** bit2017 has joined #bitcoin-dev
631 2016-01-28T14:17:04 *** StormDev has joined #bitcoin-dev
632 2016-01-28T14:17:40 <priidu> nibbler: iirc, both the "getnetworkhashps" and "getmininginfo" commands return it
633 2016-01-28T14:17:50 <priidu> maybe there are more
634 2016-01-28T14:17:56 <priidu> but those pop to mind first
635 2016-01-28T14:18:01 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-dev
636 2016-01-28T14:19:17 *** MrHodl has joined #bitcoin-dev
637 2016-01-28T14:20:30 *** tantalum has joined #bitcoin-dev
638 2016-01-28T14:20:36 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
639 2016-01-28T14:22:09 *** natloz has joined #bitcoin-dev
640 2016-01-28T14:24:32 *** core__ has quit IRC
641 2016-01-28T14:25:05 *** core__ has joined #bitcoin-dev
642 2016-01-28T14:25:20 *** nok has joined #bitcoin-dev
643 2016-01-28T14:26:25 *** rmwb has quit IRC
644 2016-01-28T14:26:48 *** st0opkid has quit IRC
645 2016-01-28T14:27:24 *** st0opkid has joined #bitcoin-dev
646 2016-01-28T14:29:15 *** natloz has quit IRC
647 2016-01-28T14:34:57 *** natloz has joined #bitcoin-dev
648 2016-01-28T14:40:00 *** A|an has joined #bitcoin-dev
649 2016-01-28T14:42:02 *** tjader has quit IRC
650 2016-01-28T14:42:07 *** c-cex-yuriy has quit IRC
651 2016-01-28T14:43:07 *** alpalp has quit IRC
652 2016-01-28T14:43:09 *** natloz has quit IRC
653 2016-01-28T14:43:34 *** natloz has joined #bitcoin-dev
654 2016-01-28T14:44:15 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
655 2016-01-28T14:46:27 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
656 2016-01-28T14:52:27 *** phungus has joined #bitcoin-dev
657 2016-01-28T14:55:54 *** mdemont has quit IRC
658 2016-01-28T14:56:40 *** dangerm00se has joined #bitcoin-dev
659 2016-01-28T15:01:50 *** ThomasV has quit IRC
660 2016-01-28T15:02:12 *** K1773R has quit IRC
661 2016-01-28T15:02:15 *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-dev
662 2016-01-28T15:02:42 *** dangerm00se has quit IRC
663 2016-01-28T15:07:53 *** ignit has quit IRC
664 2016-01-28T15:12:38 *** shorena has quit IRC
665 2016-01-28T15:20:41 *** K1773R has joined #bitcoin-dev
666 2016-01-28T15:23:10 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
667 2016-01-28T15:23:53 <priidu> either way, it won't be a critical problem for a while still
668 2016-01-28T15:24:08 <priidu> but still food for thought
669 2016-01-28T15:24:26 *** Palsson has quit IRC
670 2016-01-28T15:27:48 *** rmwb has quit IRC
671 2016-01-28T15:29:25 *** CheckDavid has quit IRC
672 2016-01-28T15:29:29 *** markus-k has quit IRC
673 2016-01-28T15:29:40 *** markus-k has joined #bitcoin-dev
674 2016-01-28T15:30:43 *** zzyzx has joined #bitcoin-dev
675 2016-01-28T15:30:51 *** zzyzx is now known as Guest54430
676 2016-01-28T15:32:15 *** Guest54430 is now known as roidster
677 2016-01-28T15:32:45 *** roidster is now known as Guest52040
678 2016-01-28T15:33:04 *** Guest52040 is now known as roidster
679 2016-01-28T15:33:11 *** Palsson has joined #bitcoin-dev
680 2016-01-28T15:34:36 *** natloz has quit IRC
681 2016-01-28T15:38:02 *** arowser has quit IRC
682 2016-01-28T15:38:32 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-dev
683 2016-01-28T15:39:27 *** agricocb has quit IRC
684 2016-01-28T15:39:51 *** zooko has joined #bitcoin-dev
685 2016-01-28T15:51:12 *** DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-dev
686 2016-01-28T15:53:54 *** merlincorey has quit IRC
687 2016-01-28T15:53:57 *** rolandnsharp has quit IRC
688 2016-01-28T15:54:03 *** merlincorey has joined #bitcoin-dev
689 2016-01-28T15:54:07 *** rolandnsharp has joined #bitcoin-dev
690 2016-01-28T15:54:54 *** GAit has quit IRC
691 2016-01-28T15:55:08 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
692 2016-01-28T15:57:49 *** tjader has quit IRC
693 2016-01-28T15:58:09 *** zooko` has joined #bitcoin-dev
694 2016-01-28T15:58:25 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
695 2016-01-28T15:58:46 *** natloz has joined #bitcoin-dev
696 2016-01-28T16:00:20 *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-dev
697 2016-01-28T16:00:21 *** paveljanik has quit IRC
698 2016-01-28T16:00:21 *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-dev
699 2016-01-28T16:00:38 *** zooko has quit IRC
700 2016-01-28T16:02:37 *** agricocb has joined #bitcoin-dev
701 2016-01-28T16:03:54 *** agricocb has joined #bitcoin-dev
702 2016-01-28T16:04:41 *** Belxjander has quit IRC
703 2016-01-28T16:05:07 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
704 2016-01-28T16:05:27 *** zooko` is now known as zooko
705 2016-01-28T16:10:26 *** tjader has quit IRC
706 2016-01-28T16:11:31 *** Belxjander has joined #bitcoin-dev
707 2016-01-28T16:12:08 *** Virtuall_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
708 2016-01-28T16:16:17 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
709 2016-01-28T16:16:57 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
710 2016-01-28T16:17:10 *** Burrito has joined #bitcoin-dev
711 2016-01-28T16:18:20 *** treehug88 has joined #bitcoin-dev
712 2016-01-28T16:18:53 *** natloz has quit IRC
713 2016-01-28T16:20:08 *** ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-dev
714 2016-01-28T16:21:12 *** CodesInChaos has quit IRC
715 2016-01-28T16:23:22 *** treehug88 has quit IRC
716 2016-01-28T16:24:43 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
717 2016-01-28T16:25:49 *** n0n0_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
718 2016-01-28T16:25:55 *** agricocb has quit IRC
719 2016-01-28T16:26:42 *** agricocb has joined #bitcoin-dev
720 2016-01-28T16:27:14 *** agricocb1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
721 2016-01-28T16:27:36 *** agricocb has quit IRC
722 2016-01-28T16:27:52 *** agricocb has joined #bitcoin-dev
723 2016-01-28T16:29:56 *** n0n0 has quit IRC
724 2016-01-28T16:30:09 *** rmwb has quit IRC
725 2016-01-28T16:31:30 *** agricocb1 has quit IRC
726 2016-01-28T16:37:43 *** job_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
727 2016-01-28T16:39:07 *** Palsson has quit IRC
728 2016-01-28T16:40:47 *** IAmNotDorian has quit IRC
729 2016-01-28T16:40:58 *** joecool has joined #bitcoin-dev
730 2016-01-28T16:41:54 *** Ducky- has quit IRC
731 2016-01-28T16:43:24 *** qsipp has joined #bitcoin-dev
732 2016-01-28T16:44:19 *** CodesInChaos has joined #bitcoin-dev
733 2016-01-28T16:44:25 *** Defcronyke has quit IRC
734 2016-01-28T16:44:49 <qsipp> anyone active?
735 2016-01-28T16:45:37 *** qsipp has quit IRC
736 2016-01-28T16:45:44 *** Defcronyke has joined #bitcoin-dev
737 2016-01-28T16:47:35 *** Virtuall_ has quit IRC
738 2016-01-28T16:48:13 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
739 2016-01-28T16:48:20 *** Ahmed90 has joined #bitcoin-dev
740 2016-01-28T16:48:57 *** zzyzx has joined #bitcoin-dev
741 2016-01-28T16:49:11 *** zzyzx is now known as Guest13742
742 2016-01-28T16:49:54 <btcdrak> what's up?
743 2016-01-28T16:50:05 *** roidster has quit IRC
744 2016-01-28T16:50:20 *** Guest13742 is now known as roidster
745 2016-01-28T16:50:50 *** roidster is now known as Guest23846
746 2016-01-28T16:52:36 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
747 2016-01-28T16:53:31 *** Guest23846 is now known as roidster
748 2016-01-28T16:53:46 *** zooko` has joined #bitcoin-dev
749 2016-01-28T16:55:28 *** zooko has quit IRC
750 2016-01-28T16:55:29 *** zooko` is now known as zooko
751 2016-01-28T16:56:00 *** Emcy has quit IRC
752 2016-01-28T16:56:17 *** cjcj has quit IRC
753 2016-01-28T16:56:45 *** Grouver has quit IRC
754 2016-01-28T16:57:22 *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-dev
755 2016-01-28T16:58:40 *** joecool has quit IRC
756 2016-01-28T16:58:59 *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-dev
757 2016-01-28T17:02:24 *** wumpus has quit IRC
758 2016-01-28T17:03:27 *** wumpus has joined #bitcoin-dev
759 2016-01-28T17:05:21 *** natloz has joined #bitcoin-dev
760 2016-01-28T17:06:17 *** Raziel has joined #bitcoin-dev
761 2016-01-28T17:09:05 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
762 2016-01-28T17:11:40 *** atgreen has quit IRC
763 2016-01-28T17:18:47 <priidu> any takers on my question from before? :P
764 2016-01-28T17:19:58 <priidu> http://bitcoinstats.com/irc/bitcoin-dev/logs/2016/01/28#l1453988677.0
765 2016-01-28T17:20:56 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
766 2016-01-28T17:24:39 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
767 2016-01-28T17:26:46 *** ghtdak has quit IRC
768 2016-01-28T17:27:54 *** ghtdak has joined #bitcoin-dev
769 2016-01-28T17:32:12 *** bityogi has joined #bitcoin-dev
770 2016-01-28T17:34:38 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
771 2016-01-28T17:34:46 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
772 2016-01-28T17:38:21 *** t7 has joined #bitcoin-dev
773 2016-01-28T17:41:26 *** tjader has quit IRC
774 2016-01-28T17:42:21 <kanzure> https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2016-January/000061.html
775 2016-01-28T17:42:30 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
776 2016-01-28T17:47:03 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
777 2016-01-28T17:47:52 *** joecool has joined #bitcoin-dev
778 2016-01-28T17:51:22 *** joecool has left #bitcoin-dev
779 2016-01-28T17:52:24 *** brson has joined #bitcoin-dev
780 2016-01-28T17:53:08 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
781 2016-01-28T17:55:42 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
782 2016-01-28T17:57:02 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
783 2016-01-28T17:57:49 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
784 2016-01-28T18:02:04 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
785 2016-01-28T18:02:14 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
786 2016-01-28T18:03:09 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
787 2016-01-28T18:03:13 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
788 2016-01-28T18:06:56 *** janko33 has joined #bitcoin-dev
789 2016-01-28T18:07:06 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
790 2016-01-28T18:09:48 *** erasmospunk has joined #bitcoin-dev
791 2016-01-28T18:12:21 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
792 2016-01-28T18:16:38 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
793 2016-01-28T18:17:54 *** JeromeLegoupil has joined #bitcoin-dev
794 2016-01-28T18:19:36 *** trixisowned has joined #bitcoin-dev
795 2016-01-28T18:22:06 *** twixisowned has quit IRC
796 2016-01-28T18:22:18 *** merlincorey has quit IRC
797 2016-01-28T18:22:18 *** merlincorey has joined #bitcoin-dev
798 2016-01-28T18:23:31 *** azm1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
799 2016-01-28T18:23:57 *** GAit has quit IRC
800 2016-01-28T18:26:37 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
801 2016-01-28T18:27:57 *** RoboTeddy has quit IRC
802 2016-01-28T18:28:06 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
803 2016-01-28T18:28:36 *** RoboTeddy has joined #bitcoin-dev
804 2016-01-28T18:32:25 *** tachys has joined #bitcoin-dev
805 2016-01-28T18:33:26 *** rmwb has quit IRC
806 2016-01-28T18:34:52 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
807 2016-01-28T18:35:01 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-dev
808 2016-01-28T18:35:07 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
809 2016-01-28T18:40:20 *** tjader has quit IRC
810 2016-01-28T18:45:58 *** brson has quit IRC
811 2016-01-28T18:46:38 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
812 2016-01-28T18:47:12 *** brson has joined #bitcoin-dev
813 2016-01-28T18:49:52 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
814 2016-01-28T18:50:19 *** ThomasV has quit IRC
815 2016-01-28T18:50:26 *** jgarzik has joined #bitcoin-dev
816 2016-01-28T18:50:26 *** jgarzik has quit IRC
817 2016-01-28T18:50:26 *** jgarzik has joined #bitcoin-dev
818 2016-01-28T18:50:37 <Luke-Jr> possible topic-- priority: what do I need to fix and/or expand my maintaining-scope to include, to keep it?
819 2016-01-28T18:50:38 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
820 2016-01-28T18:52:42 *** A|an has quit IRC
821 2016-01-28T18:53:56 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
822 2016-01-28T18:54:06 <Luke-Jr> but I may be driving for part of the meeting..
823 2016-01-28T18:55:38 *** copumpkin has quit IRC
824 2016-01-28T18:56:30 <jtimon> possible topic: "refactoring window" when is that?
825 2016-01-28T18:57:35 <Tasoshi> possible topic: "the blocksize question" Are we to prioritise scaling onchain or are we to prioritise ripple like settlement systems?
826 2016-01-28T18:57:39 *** spkm_ is now known as spkm
827 2016-01-28T18:58:20 *** ongolaBoy has quit IRC
828 2016-01-28T18:59:15 *** Ducky- has joined #bitcoin-dev
829 2016-01-28T19:00:17 <cfields> Tasoshi: this is a technical discussion
830 2016-01-28T19:01:09 <wumpus> #startmeeting
831 2016-01-28T19:01:09 <lightningbot`> Meeting started Thu Jan 28 19:01:09 2016 UTC. The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
832 2016-01-28T19:01:09 <lightningbot`> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
833 2016-01-28T19:01:26 <petertodd> hi
834 2016-01-28T19:01:35 *** gmaxwell has joined #bitcoin-dev
835 2016-01-28T19:01:43 <wumpus> #topic refactoring window
836 2016-01-28T19:02:01 *** what_now has joined #bitcoin-dev
837 2016-01-28T19:02:06 <jtimon> I just want to have a clearer idea of when those are
838 2016-01-28T19:02:20 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
839 2016-01-28T19:02:27 <wumpus> I'm fine with starting moveonly stuff at least - I've already merged #7348
840 2016-01-28T19:02:32 <jtimon> and what it means when we're on a "refactoring window"
841 2016-01-28T19:02:55 <wumpus> we're nearing the 0.12 release, and there's not that much urgent to be merged otherwise
842 2016-01-28T19:03:10 <petertodd> note that there is significant segwit work that is affected by this, OTOH, it may not be affected in a way that matters
843 2016-01-28T19:03:22 *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-dev
844 2016-01-28T19:03:29 <what_now> Hello, sometimes I get a time out on rpc calls to bitcoind. I am using 0.11.2. I have a big wallet file(big keypool). The slowdown occurrs upon all commands(example wallet decryption too) not just sending out funds.
845 2016-01-28T19:03:44 <wumpus> not sure about that petertodd, but they're based on 0.12 AFAIK
846 2016-01-28T19:03:46 <petertodd> what_now: we're in the middle of a dev meeting; best if you ask again in an hour
847 2016-01-28T19:03:49 <jonasschnelli> what_now: please use #bitcoin-core-dev (meeting in this channel)
848 2016-01-28T19:03:58 <Luke-Jr> jtimon: can you prioritise refactors gthat dont conflict segwit?
849 2016-01-28T19:04:21 <petertodd> wumpus: yeah, being based on v0.12 is part of what helps here
850 2016-01-28T19:04:23 <wumpus> so it doesn't affect segwit immedaitely, although at some point it needs to be forward-ported over the moves
851 2016-01-28T19:04:34 <what_now> Ok thanks
852 2016-01-28T19:04:47 <wumpus> (which for pure move-only isn't too much effort, at least)
853 2016-01-28T19:04:54 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
854 2016-01-28T19:04:55 <petertodd> wumpus: I'm assuming we're most likely to release segwit first as a 0.12.x?
855 2016-01-28T19:05:03 *** btcaddict has joined #bitcoin-dev
856 2016-01-28T19:05:09 <wumpus> petertodd: I suppose so
857 2016-01-28T19:05:21 <wumpus> 0.13 will be june-july
858 2016-01-28T19:05:22 <btcdrak> petertodd: ofc, 0.13 isnt scheduled for months yet
859 2016-01-28T19:05:24 <gmaxwell> It previously occured to me that having refactor windows at the beginning of a version cycle may interfear with the constant backporting we do then.
860 2016-01-28T19:05:26 *** rsx has joined #bitcoin-dev
861 2016-01-28T19:05:39 <Luke-Jr> but it should be merged to master first
862 2016-01-28T19:05:40 <jtimon> petertodd: my longest consensus refactoring branch is based on last-0.11.99 3cd836c
863 2016-01-28T19:06:02 <wumpus> gmaxwell: it does, but 0.12.0 final is near, I don't expect much more backporting to be needed now
864 2016-01-28T19:07:17 <wumpus> we'll do a rc3 next week and if really necessary a rc4 the week after that and then that's that
865 2016-01-28T19:07:44 <jtimon> Luke-Jr: if we don't want to backport refactors with segwit and we want to wait for segwit, then the 0.13 refactor window may be missed again for really simple things like #7310, which I assume you consider conflicting with segwit
866 2016-01-28T19:08:50 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
867 2016-01-28T19:08:53 <jtimon> gmaxwell: yeah, that's what I've been saying since the first time we talked about this windows, I think they are far best at the end of the release cycle, before forking the next version to release from master
868 2016-01-28T19:09:08 <Luke-Jr> jtimon: I was thinking more like closing refactors a week after segwsit
869 2016-01-28T19:09:17 <gmaxwell> I guess the thing to admit is that there is no good time for refactors, and that we'll just have to deal with their costs.
870 2016-01-28T19:09:40 <gmaxwell> jtimon: thats a point.
871 2016-01-28T19:09:43 <wumpus> yes, otherwise you keep postponing
872 2016-01-28T19:09:58 <jtimon> if we had done it before forking 0.12...I really think that's the best time (doesn't mean that it won't have costs)
873 2016-01-28T19:10:06 <wumpus> as said above, I'd say now is a pretty good time, but if people prefer postponing I won't complain, it's always a bad time
874 2016-01-28T19:10:25 <wumpus> no, before forking 0.12 it was *really* busy
875 2016-01-28T19:10:35 <wumpus> all kinds of stuff that needs to b e merged as soon as possible
876 2016-01-28T19:10:56 <wumpus> at least it came to rest a bit now
877 2016-01-28T19:12:25 <btcdrak> yeah, a lot of PRs are mergeable now without needing rebased.
878 2016-01-28T19:12:39 <Luke-Jr> imo do non-SW-conlicts first and if we end up conflicting anyway so be it
879 2016-01-28T19:12:40 <wumpus> but there's nothing that needs to be merged urgently
880 2016-01-28T19:13:25 <jtimon> Luke-Jr: better yet, what about not bip68-112-conflicting, not versionbits conflicting and non-segwit conflicting ?
881 2016-01-28T19:13:33 <btcdrak> I do think it's time to start thinking about merging #7184 and #6564 after they get a few more ACKs
882 2016-01-28T19:13:42 <wumpus> in contrast to before a release deadline, when there's pressure to get things in
883 2016-01-28T19:13:46 <jtimon> </sarcasm>
884 2016-01-28T19:13:47 <petertodd> I'd vote for getting it over with now, as jtimon's been rather patient :)
885 2016-01-28T19:14:00 <petertodd> (for dev branch)
886 2016-01-28T19:15:17 <wumpus> ok, next topic?
887 2016-01-28T19:15:23 <Tasoshi> Everyone complains that the blocksize is not discussed in these meetings. So maybe it can be discussed for once?
888 2016-01-28T19:15:32 <wumpus> Tasoshi: no
889 2016-01-28T19:15:37 <Tasoshi> why not?
890 2016-01-28T19:15:47 <Tasoshi> has a decision been made on it?
891 2016-01-28T19:16:03 <maaku> Tasoshi: this is not the place
892 2016-01-28T19:16:14 <petertodd> Tasoshi: this is a technical meeting to discuss relatively short-term dev work
893 2016-01-28T19:16:23 <cfields> Tasoshi: these meetings are for our day-to-day work. We need a place for that, even if it's not sexy topics. Please respect that.
894 2016-01-28T19:16:28 <Tasoshi> maaku of course it is, it is a technical meeting, so lets discuss a technical topic, the blocksize question
895 2016-01-28T19:16:31 <wumpus> yes, we'll not do a blocksize hardfork for now
896 2016-01-28T19:16:45 *** mrkent_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
897 2016-01-28T19:16:52 <Tasoshi> so the decision is to not maxbloklimit_increase?
898 2016-01-28T19:16:53 <jonasschnelli> wumpus: +1. Next topic?
899 2016-01-28T19:17:06 <Tasoshi> until when?
900 2016-01-28T19:17:13 <gmaxwell> Tasoshi: Core has a published capacity roadmap, feel free to comment about that on the list.
901 2016-01-28T19:17:21 <Tasoshi> this isn't the core chan
902 2016-01-28T19:17:26 *** zooko has quit IRC
903 2016-01-28T19:17:26 <Tasoshi> this is general bitcoin development
904 2016-01-28T19:17:27 *** patcon has joined #bitcoin-dev
905 2016-01-28T19:17:35 <wumpus> Tasoshi: this is a bitcoin core meeting
906 2016-01-28T19:17:47 <Tasoshi> maybe core should have it's meetings in the core chan?
907 2016-01-28T19:17:50 <wumpus> Tasoshi: stop interfering
908 2016-01-28T19:17:54 *** mrkent has quit IRC
909 2016-01-28T19:17:55 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o wumpus
910 2016-01-28T19:17:56 <Tasoshi> I thought this was a general bitcoin dev meeting
911 2016-01-28T19:18:00 <Luke-Jr> wumpus: it is genereal bitcoin meeting..
912 2016-01-28T19:18:08 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
913 2016-01-28T19:18:11 <jtimon> actually he has a point, maybe these meetings should happen in #bitcoin-core-dev
914 2016-01-28T19:18:11 <gmaxwell> Tasoshi: please you're disrupting the meeting.
915 2016-01-28T19:18:12 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
916 2016-01-28T19:18:22 <jtimon> but yeah, not the time
917 2016-01-28T19:18:24 <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: still nlo decisions are made in meetings
918 2016-01-28T19:18:30 <petertodd> jtimon: seems reasonable if this keeps coming up, but that's for next meeting
919 2016-01-28T19:18:33 <Luke-Jr> no*
920 2016-01-28T19:19:10 <wallet42> getrawtransaction works as long as a pruning is not enabled and at least 1 spendable output is still available right?
921 2016-01-28T19:19:29 <Luke-Jr> Tasoshi: email the ML to schedule a new meeting another day, maybe?
922 2016-01-28T19:19:43 <wumpus> we can move the meeting to #bitcoin-core-dev, sure
923 2016-01-28T19:19:46 <Tasoshi> or maybe you guys can actually discuss it
924 2016-01-28T19:19:48 <Tasoshi> but whatever
925 2016-01-28T19:19:54 <Tasoshi> the users are about to vote
926 2016-01-28T19:19:57 <jtimon> anyway, so the refactor window is from now to when? and what does it mean that there's a refactor window?
927 2016-01-28T19:19:58 <maaku> NEXT TOPIC
928 2016-01-28T19:20:00 <Tasoshi> you can bury your heads all you want
929 2016-01-28T19:20:02 <gmaxwell> Topic suggestion: Any outstanding issues for 0.12RC?
930 2016-01-28T19:20:22 *** wumpus sets mode: +b *!*@unaffiliated/tasoshi
931 2016-01-28T19:20:24 *** Tasoshi was kicked by wumpus (Kindergarten is elsewhere!)
932 2016-01-28T19:20:34 <wumpus> #topic outstanding issues for 0.12.0
933 2016-01-28T19:20:55 <Luke-Jr> not declaring removal of priority
934 2016-01-28T19:20:56 <cfields> uhmm, it was brought to my attention that we may need to sign the win32 release with a new key for win7+
935 2016-01-28T19:21:16 <jonasschnelli> expired?
936 2016-01-28T19:21:23 <cfields> so, ignoring the fact that we need a new key in general, we can upgrade ours to work for this release
937 2016-01-28T19:21:34 <wumpus> it needs to use sha256
938 2016-01-28T19:21:36 <cfields> i believe it doesn't take long. I'll be starting that process today
939 2016-01-28T19:21:41 <cfields> right, current is sha1
940 2016-01-28T19:21:45 <jonasschnelli> ^^
941 2016-01-28T19:21:49 <btcdrak> ouch
942 2016-01-28T19:22:10 <cfields> i'll get an eta on that asap so we'll know if it's worth holding up rc3
943 2016-01-28T19:22:18 <wumpus> #action cfields: new key for win release signing
944 2016-01-28T19:22:24 <what_now> Topic suggestion: creating a roadmap for aspiring devs to catch up with code?
945 2016-01-28T19:22:33 <petertodd> cfields: do we have an idea of how many windows users test rc's btw?
946 2016-01-28T19:22:36 <btcdrak> otherwise jonasschnelli could sign, he has a key iirc
947 2016-01-28T19:22:52 <jonasschnelli> btcdrak: only OSX
948 2016-01-28T19:23:15 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
949 2016-01-28T19:23:18 <petertodd> what_now: I'd suggest posting that to the dev list; also, first look at bitcoin.org's documentation efforts
950 2016-01-28T19:23:20 <jonasschnelli> petertodd: I test them.. have serval win VMs here. Although only "smoke" tests.
951 2016-01-28T19:23:24 <cfields> btcdrak: not nice to change keys during the release cycle. I believe this keeps the current chain intact
952 2016-01-28T19:23:37 <btcdrak> cfields: agree
953 2016-01-28T19:23:39 <wumpus> what_now: not really a meeting topic, better to ask that outside the meeting
954 2016-01-28T19:23:46 <what_now> Thank you petter see you in 2 years :(
955 2016-01-28T19:23:56 <cfields> petertodd: same as jonasschnelli above. I verify that they start up and are infact the correct tagged release
956 2016-01-28T19:23:59 <what_now> Roger, gonna shut up now
957 2016-01-28T19:24:08 <petertodd> jonasschnelli: cool - I was thinking that if we're not getting many windows testers, that suggests we shouldn't hold back the rc releases because of a windows-specific issue.
958 2016-01-28T19:24:27 <wumpus> well we need some key for signing, it doesn't matter too much which one
959 2016-01-28T19:24:47 <jonasschnelli> I can offer to sign the OSX binaries in future (maybe from 0.13)
960 2016-01-28T19:25:38 <cfields> makes sense to me, since you're the most active on osx these days
961 2016-01-28T19:25:38 <wumpus> cool jonasschnelli
962 2016-01-28T19:25:44 *** copumpkin has joined #bitcoin-dev
963 2016-01-28T19:26:30 <wumpus> ok, that concludes the topic I think, we don't know how long it will take to get a new key, if it takes too long someone else can sign this time
964 2016-01-28T19:26:58 *** GAit has quit IRC
965 2016-01-28T19:27:34 <wumpus> I mean concludes the signing topic, not the "outstanding issues" topic
966 2016-01-28T19:28:27 <wumpus> it seems there is still some controversy re: priority, or at least how the changes should be noted in the release notes
967 2016-01-28T19:28:42 <wumpus> e.g. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7346
968 2016-01-28T19:28:50 <jonasschnelli> +1 for keep it as it is
969 2016-01-28T19:29:02 <gmaxwell> I realized tht we never did anything about the issue I raised with localhost being banning whitelisted + autoonion support; do we care?
970 2016-01-28T19:29:31 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: is there anything we can do to make it easier for LJR to support priority if Core doesn't?
971 2016-01-28T19:29:39 <wumpus> jonasschnelli: I'd say so too - though it makes sense to mention the plans to remove priority in the release notes
972 2016-01-28T19:30:01 *** cryptapus has quit IRC
973 2016-01-28T19:30:04 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: or i should say, Bitcoin <insert-snappy-name-here> :)
974 2016-01-28T19:30:08 <jonasschnelli> Okay. I follow the majority.
975 2016-01-28T19:30:22 *** ehappy has quit IRC
976 2016-01-28T19:30:23 <petertodd> gmaxwell: link?
977 2016-01-28T19:30:42 <wumpus> gmaxwell: of course we do
978 2016-01-28T19:30:56 <wumpus> petertodd: I think that's a good question
979 2016-01-28T19:31:26 <jonasschnelli> I guess there is no reported issue.
980 2016-01-28T19:31:30 <paveljanik> The plan should have been announced even earlier. Even the change in the default priority settings.
981 2016-01-28T19:31:35 <gmaxwell> there is a blinking _pr_
982 2016-01-28T19:31:36 <wumpus> I mean some people are bound to want to keep some semblance of priority support, but supporting it in the current mempool framework is hard/inefficient
983 2016-01-28T19:31:39 * jtimon remembers asking a similar question to Luke-Jr some time ago...
984 2016-01-28T19:31:50 <gmaxwell> I'll go rebase it and cut it down.
985 2016-01-28T19:31:58 <paveljanik> What we can do now is to announce the removal of prio code - special section in release notes, probably?
986 2016-01-28T19:32:18 <wumpus> paveljanik: yes , we should certainly announce it somewher
987 2016-01-28T19:32:23 <jonasschnelli> Okay. I'm happy to work on the banning whitelisted + autoonion support issue (start end of feb.).
988 2016-01-28T19:32:31 *** cryptapus_ has quit IRC
989 2016-01-28T19:32:34 <wumpus> if only to get an idea what people outside direct dev circles think about it
990 2016-01-28T19:32:50 <gmaxwell> the original PR got hung up because of the locking mess around nodestats.
991 2016-01-28T19:32:59 <wumpus> I'm happing to work on it too, but after 0.12.0 release
992 2016-01-28T19:33:02 <wumpus> happy*
993 2016-01-28T19:33:10 <gmaxwell> (it's PR 7082) but I can make the change more minimal.
994 2016-01-28T19:33:16 <jonasschnelli> Yes. I guess after some changes there i'm familiar with the locking concept in CNode CNodeStat
995 2016-01-28T19:33:47 <wumpus> it's not something I have enough confidence in to get correct for a last minute fixup
996 2016-01-28T19:34:08 <jonasschnelli> Wasn't aware of that PR (7082). Will test / rebase and or extend.
997 2016-01-28T19:34:09 <gmaxwell> wumpus: yes, I can just change the patch to remove the privledging of localhost only.
998 2016-01-28T19:34:26 <wumpus> gmaxwell: yep, if we can slip in some simpler fix that'd be better
999 2016-01-28T19:34:30 <jonasschnelli> No. I guess its for 0.13 or 0.12.1?
1000 2016-01-28T19:34:36 <wumpus> then leave the rest for 0.13/0.12.1
1001 2016-01-28T19:34:46 <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: please lt me. I just wanted confirmation that it wasn't intentionally dropped.
1002 2016-01-28T19:34:59 <jonasschnelli> Sure.
1003 2016-01-28T19:35:04 <gmaxwell> yea, just the one line change should at least avoid the simple attack, I'll do that.
1004 2016-01-28T19:35:08 <wumpus> no, certainly not intentionally, it's just easy to forget about things
1005 2016-01-28T19:35:14 <jonasschnelli> Do we need a solution for this in 0.12.0?
1006 2016-01-28T19:35:20 *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1007 2016-01-28T19:35:21 *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1008 2016-01-28T19:35:27 <gmaxwell> Thats why I brought it up.
1009 2016-01-28T19:35:40 <jtimon> jonasschnelli: the one line change ?
1010 2016-01-28T19:35:53 <gmaxwell> Please see the PR, without doing something the autoonion support makes connection exhaustion attacks much easier.
1011 2016-01-28T19:35:56 <wumpus> #action gmaxwell: "one line change" to fix #7082 in 0.12.0
1012 2016-01-28T19:36:02 <gmaxwell> Thanks.
1013 2016-01-28T19:36:04 <jonasschnelli> +75 â37 in main/net seems to late for a after-rc2-change
1014 2016-01-28T19:36:17 <jonasschnelli> ok. Agree.
1015 2016-01-28T19:36:58 <petertodd> gmaxwell: so, specifically you're worried about exhausting all incoming connections right?
1016 2016-01-28T19:37:02 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
1017 2016-01-28T19:37:38 <wumpus> yes, it's about incoming connections
1018 2016-01-28T19:38:21 *** wumpus sets mode: -b *!*@unaffiliated/tasoshi
1019 2016-01-28T19:38:29 <gmaxwell> petertodd: yes we have eviction to protect from that but localhost is excempted.
1020 2016-01-28T19:38:29 <paveljanik> I think we should also announce somewhere that current openssl bugs do not affect Bitcoin Core...
1021 2016-01-28T19:38:38 *** trakinas has quit IRC
1022 2016-01-28T19:38:50 <wumpus> good idea paveljanik
1023 2016-01-28T19:39:07 <jonasschnelli> +1
1024 2016-01-28T19:39:14 <wumpus> #topic how does this new "critical" OpenSSL release affect us
1025 2016-01-28T19:39:17 <jonasschnelli> btcdrak: a website blog post?
1026 2016-01-28T19:39:19 *** rsx has quit IRC
1027 2016-01-28T19:39:37 <wumpus> <kanzure> https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2016-January/000061.html
1028 2016-01-28T19:39:42 <btcdrak> jonasschnelli: sure.
1029 2016-01-28T19:39:43 <wumpus> #link https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2016-January/000061.html
1030 2016-01-28T19:40:00 <wumpus> nothing that affect us in any way?
1031 2016-01-28T19:40:15 <jonasschnelli> Does it not affect bip70 / GUI? (haven't checked)
1032 2016-01-28T19:40:16 <wumpus> also not for qt payment protocol TLS stuff?
1033 2016-01-28T19:41:13 <gmaxwell> I wish we had some way of measureing if that stuff was ever used, it seems barely usable (send only, gui only) to me and has been a source of multiple problems.
1034 2016-01-28T19:41:19 <jtimon> did the replacement for the wallet encription PR get merged? what other parts of core still depend on openssl apart from bip70?
1035 2016-01-28T19:41:30 <wumpus> yes, it is being used
1036 2016-01-28T19:42:00 <jonasschnelli> jtimon: entropy, AES (wallet), bip70
1037 2016-01-28T19:42:19 <wumpus> jtimon: no, I think those all need rebase
1038 2016-01-28T19:42:23 <jonasschnelli> jtimon: and the wallet encryption PR from cfields is not yet merged.
1039 2016-01-28T19:42:40 <wumpus> I think they're all labeled 0.13
1040 2016-01-28T19:42:43 <jtimon> thanks
1041 2016-01-28T19:42:44 <jonasschnelli> and sipa/gmaxwells fortuna change needs also rebase.
1042 2016-01-28T19:43:01 <jonasschnelli> (although we should pack it into a sep. library)
1043 2016-01-28T19:43:04 <cfields> wumpus: according to that mail, 1.0.1 isn't affected
1044 2016-01-28T19:43:13 *** murch has joined #bitcoin-dev
1045 2016-01-28T19:43:17 <gmaxwell> vetting if any particular openssl release impacts the BIP70 implementation is too much work; I'd generally be unwilling to sign off on a claim that it didn't. The amount of involved code is huge, including a bunch of code in QT.
1046 2016-01-28T19:43:19 <cfields> (not discounting self-builders of course, just pointing that out)
1047 2016-01-28T19:43:36 <wumpus> yes, fortuna needs to be a separate lib
1048 2016-01-28T19:43:50 <jtimon> are there any plans to replace openssl for entropy?
1049 2016-01-28T19:43:56 *** patcon has quit IRC
1050 2016-01-28T19:44:01 <jonasschnelli> I would say static builds are nice,.. but the once we need to care about are the once that self-compile.
1051 2016-01-28T19:44:02 <wumpus> jtimon: yes
1052 2016-01-28T19:44:29 <jtimon> wumpus: oh, I see, that's the fortuna thing
1053 2016-01-28T19:44:32 <petertodd> jtimon: that's what the fortuna thing would be basically
1054 2016-01-28T19:44:32 *** deadalnix has joined #bitcoin-dev
1055 2016-01-28T19:44:41 <wumpus> jtimon: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5885
1056 2016-01-28T19:44:44 <wumpus> gmaxwell: agree on that
1057 2016-01-28T19:45:25 <wumpus> gmaxwell: I don't expect that from you either - my question was more "does it affect TLS usage"
1058 2016-01-28T19:45:28 <jonasschnelli> I would also see it as a plain C(89 or 99) library
1059 2016-01-28T19:46:00 <petertodd> jonasschnelli: fortuna? why isn't C++ ok here?
1060 2016-01-28T19:46:07 <wumpus> as openssl is basically one huge TLS library I expect the answer to that is "yes"
1061 2016-01-28T19:46:08 <jonasschnelli> petertodd: MCU
1062 2016-01-28T19:46:18 *** VirtuallyLaw has joined #bitcoin-dev
1063 2016-01-28T19:46:26 <petertodd> jonasschnelli: oh, you mean for microprocessors?
1064 2016-01-28T19:46:28 <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: there are many difficult complications in making a safe, generic RNG, first among them is fork detection; which is more or less impossible to do completely safely on linux. :(
1065 2016-01-28T19:46:55 <wumpus> gmaxwell: we only have to be better than openssl
1066 2016-01-28T19:47:13 <jonasschnelli> I would say libsecp256k1 together with a C based fort. implementation would be a very good team.
1067 2016-01-28T19:47:13 <gmaxwell> (even if you do the slow thing of testing the PID on every call, a sequence of multiple forks could leave you with the same PID as a now-gone grandparent process)
1068 2016-01-28T19:47:14 <petertodd> wumpus: we still have to be better than /dev/urandom :)
1069 2016-01-28T19:47:21 <wumpus> if it's impossible to do safely on linux, then openssl doesn't do that either
1070 2016-01-28T19:47:32 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
1071 2016-01-28T19:47:41 <wumpus> note also that bitcoin never forks
1072 2016-01-28T19:47:46 <jonasschnelli> Long term, i don't think entropy really matters for bitcoin core
1073 2016-01-28T19:47:55 <wumpus> (well, it does, but only to launch ancillary processes)
1074 2016-01-28T19:47:56 <gmaxwell> wumpus: yes but when we must be a library we need to be safe for more than bitcoin.
1075 2016-01-28T19:48:02 <jonasschnelli> Mainly for the const time hack in libsecp
1076 2016-01-28T19:48:14 <jonasschnelli> I don't expect people generating keys on the same machine then core runs.
1077 2016-01-28T19:48:15 <wumpus> gmaxwell: just add a disclaimer 'not fork safe'
1078 2016-01-28T19:48:18 *** Guest87_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1079 2016-01-28T19:48:18 *** Guest87_ is now known as MRIO
1080 2016-01-28T19:48:35 <wumpus> I don't think it needs to satisfy any possible use case everyone can have
1081 2016-01-28T19:48:39 <jonasschnelli> 'not fork safe'? HW or SF....
1082 2016-01-28T19:48:42 <btcdrak> "<@wumpus> note also that bitcoin never forks"
1083 2016-01-28T19:48:44 <jonasschnelli> </funmode>
1084 2016-01-28T19:48:47 <cfields> lol
1085 2016-01-28T19:48:54 <wumpus> LOL btcdrak
1086 2016-01-28T19:48:56 <petertodd> wumpus: see, that's one of the reasons I'd lean towards C++ - I'm not sure we want to be in the business of making these libraries if others' will use them
1087 2016-01-28T19:48:58 <wumpus> hadn't even thought of that
1088 2016-01-28T19:49:03 <gmaxwell> thata going to get misunderstood by the public...
1089 2016-01-28T19:49:08 <jonasschnelli> hehe
1090 2016-01-28T19:49:35 <cfields> petertodd: c++11 even has fancy prngs built-in...
1091 2016-01-28T19:49:41 <cfields> though i doubt that would go over well
1092 2016-01-28T19:50:17 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
1093 2016-01-28T19:50:31 <wumpus> in any case, I thin kfor seperation of concerns it needs to be a seperate lib, if it ever turns out useful for anyone else is not our problem ;)
1094 2016-01-28T19:50:59 <gmaxwell> in any case, these also need locking; ... regardless, I spent a fair amount of time talking to nick from tor about this, and I'm also on a mailing list of people trying to replace the RNG in openssl. I'm now pretty confident that we wouldn't be able to satisify that many people; lots of people care greatly about really high performance, which we more or less don't care about. (OpenSSL's is exception
1095 2016-01-28T19:51:05 <gmaxwell> ally slow, and we've seldom noticed)
1096 2016-01-28T19:51:16 <gmaxwell> wumpus: Sorry, I don't beleive in that "not our problem" approach. :)
1097 2016-01-28T19:51:17 <wumpus> though if jonasschnelli has applications in mind himself then it makes sense to keep those in mind
1098 2016-01-28T19:51:30 <wumpus> gmaxwell: we can't do everything for everyone
1099 2016-01-28T19:51:43 * jtimon resists to bring the C vs C++ for ultra-long-term future libconsensus topic
1100 2016-01-28T19:51:44 <wumpus> gmaxwell: well you are welcome to try, of course :)
1101 2016-01-28T19:51:57 *** blackwraith has joined #bitcoin-dev
1102 2016-01-28T19:52:16 <gmaxwell> We're going off on a tangent here in any case.
1103 2016-01-28T19:52:28 <btcdrak> -wizards
1104 2016-01-28T19:52:36 <wumpus> but sure, we can stay with openssl's RNG if that's what is preferred
1105 2016-01-28T19:52:44 <wumpus> no decision needs to be made today
1106 2016-01-28T19:52:44 <gmaxwell> I'm not saying that.
1107 2016-01-28T19:52:46 <wumpus> next topic?
1108 2016-01-28T19:53:21 <wumpus> only ~7 minutes left
1109 2016-01-28T19:53:23 <petertodd> wumpus: I just posted some important stuff re: segwit upgrades, but I don't think it needs to be discussed here yet
1110 2016-01-28T19:53:32 <petertodd> wumpus: (posted to the -dev list)
1111 2016-01-28T19:53:32 <jtimon> wumpus let's leave openssl only for bip70, even if it's not today
1112 2016-01-28T19:53:48 *** priidu has quit IRC
1113 2016-01-28T19:53:53 <wumpus> jtimon: I agree with that in theory, but if making our own RNG is really so dangerous I don't want to risk it
1114 2016-01-28T19:54:40 *** GAit has quit IRC
1115 2016-01-28T19:54:47 <petertodd> wumpus: I'd feel happier if this was part of an effort including non-bitcoin users (e.g mailing list & tor that gmaxwell mentioned above)
1116 2016-01-28T19:54:52 <wumpus> it is a really risky endavour to implement this kind of stuff ourselves and get it completely right, many people are messed up before with hand rolled RNGs in the bitcoin space
1117 2016-01-28T19:54:53 <jtimon> wumpus: maybe not for 0.13, but I trust that we will have done it already be 0.20 :p
1118 2016-01-28T19:54:54 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
1119 2016-01-28T19:55:02 <jtimon> s/be/by
1120 2016-01-28T19:55:07 <wumpus> petertodd: agree
1121 2016-01-28T19:55:25 <gmaxwell> wumpus: please don't punish me for speaking frankly. The prior efforts to upgrade ours were derailed by a desire to make something generic. I've determined that making something generic is quite hard to do right.
1122 2016-01-28T19:55:35 <wumpus> so I'm just trying to be pragmatic, yes we'd like to get rid of openssl dependency but not at all cost
1123 2016-01-28T19:55:49 <gmaxwell> I think it would be a worthwhile thing to do, but I don't think the resources can be spared to do something generic right now.
1124 2016-01-28T19:55:52 <wumpus> gmaxwell: how am I punuishing you?
1125 2016-01-28T19:55:59 <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: Agree. It takes much more time..
1126 2016-01-28T19:56:07 <jonasschnelli> But maybe other are ready to contribute.
1127 2016-01-28T19:56:19 <gmaxwell> wumpus: by jumping to not doing it at all when I raised a single complaints.
1128 2016-01-28T19:56:22 <jonasschnelli> (and I have use cases)
1129 2016-01-28T19:56:33 <wumpus> gmaxwell: I'm not saying we should do it, just that we should be careful
1130 2016-01-28T19:56:40 <gmaxwell> Sure.
1131 2016-01-28T19:56:45 <wumpus> gmaxwell: I've been saying that from the beginning and you convinced me to be even more
1132 2016-01-28T19:56:49 <petertodd> jonasschnelli: if your usecases are solidly separated from Bitcoin Core, that'd help re: review
1133 2016-01-28T19:56:57 <wumpus> that's *agreeing* with you, not punishment.
1134 2016-01-28T19:57:09 <jonasschnelli> petertodd: nice!
1135 2016-01-28T19:57:28 <jtimon> wumpus: ok, I misinterpreted your "let's be careful when doint it" as well
1136 2016-01-28T19:57:55 *** blackwraith has quit IRC
1137 2016-01-28T19:58:06 <btcdrak> On another note: aj has written some functional test scripts for OP_CSV (requires #7184 + #6564) https://github.com/ajtowns/op_csv-test - so anyone who wants to test those PRs has another tool at their disposal. We do need to think about wrapping those PRs up next month to keep on the roadmap schedule.
1138 2016-01-28T19:58:10 <wumpus> jtimon: I haven't said "let's never do this", but I'd be fine postponing it a year or so so there can be a serious generic effort
1139 2016-01-28T19:58:10 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
1140 2016-01-28T19:58:18 <wumpus> (as petertodd says)
1141 2016-01-28T19:58:36 <petertodd> RNG's are weird after all - they're not really the same skillset as normal cryptographic code
1142 2016-01-28T19:58:42 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
1143 2016-01-28T19:58:42 <wumpus> right.
1144 2016-01-28T19:59:22 <gmaxwell> wumpus: lets disuss later in the 0.13 cycle. I think getting off of OpenSSL's is important.
1145 2016-01-28T19:59:25 *** Emcy has quit IRC
1146 2016-01-28T19:59:43 *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-dev
1147 2016-01-28T19:59:44 *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-dev
1148 2016-01-28T19:59:55 <wumpus> I mean for the wallet the RNG is pretty much what it all hinges on, I don't even want to think about the consequences of a bug there
1149 2016-01-28T19:59:59 <wumpus> gmaxwell: sure
1150 2016-01-28T20:00:15 <jtimon> wumpus: I don't think I can contribute so I can't say much dates, just nacking the "never" I thought I heard but you didn't say
1151 2016-01-28T20:00:22 *** ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-dev
1152 2016-01-28T20:00:42 <paveljanik> Getting rid of openssl sounds like a plan. Lets announce it somewhere...
1153 2016-01-28T20:00:43 * btcdrak rings the bell
1154 2016-01-28T20:00:47 <wumpus> #endmeeting
1155 2016-01-28T20:00:47 <lightningbot`> Meeting ended Thu Jan 28 20:00:47 2016 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
1156 2016-01-28T20:00:47 <lightningbot`> Minutes: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-dev/2016/bitcoin-dev.2016-01-28-19.01.html
1157 2016-01-28T20:00:47 <lightningbot`> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-dev/2016/bitcoin-dev.2016-01-28-19.01.txt
1158 2016-01-28T20:00:47 <lightningbot`> Log: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-dev/2016/bitcoin-dev.2016-01-28-19.01.log.html
1159 2016-01-28T20:01:14 <petertodd> btcdrak: "rings the bell" <- by that, you mean Bitcoin trading is closed for the day, right?
1160 2016-01-28T20:01:33 <wumpus> paveljanik: as said, getting rid of openssl would be nice, but not at all cost, and there's no real urgency. THe alternatives need to be acceptable, and in the case of the RNG be need to be very sure that the replacement is up to it.
1161 2016-01-28T20:01:35 <btcdrak> petertodd: bitcoin neber sleeps...
1162 2016-01-28T20:01:47 <jonasschnelli> lol petertodd
1163 2016-01-28T20:02:16 *** what_now has quit IRC
1164 2016-01-28T20:03:09 <gmaxwell> wumpus: basically several other people have been trying to do the 'good generic rng' thing for some time, I hoped we could combine efforts, but all I've found are critically interested in high performance, perhaps at the expense of some security; which is a fairly different use case than for us... and there are a number of nasty problems, especially when you care about high performance.
1165 2016-01-28T20:03:12 <wumpus> (we can of course move forward with the less risky changes to reduce dependency on openssl)
1166 2016-01-28T20:03:18 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
1167 2016-01-28T20:03:26 <paveljanik> wumpus, understood. But we should probably first describe where it is used and then limit reduce the dependency.
1168 2016-01-28T20:03:43 <paveljanik> yes
1169 2016-01-28T20:04:24 *** rawdr has quit IRC
1170 2016-01-28T20:04:38 <wumpus> gmaxwell: yes, "high performance at the expense of security" that's quite the opposite case from us
1171 2016-01-28T20:05:07 <wumpus> gmaxwell: at least for the key generation we need security at the expense of pretty much everything else, we have some other uses for randomness that are less critical
1172 2016-01-28T20:05:14 <jonasschnelli> Yes. Bitcoin usecase does not seek HP.
1173 2016-01-28T20:05:53 <gmaxwell> In particular the pid checking on every call is really bad for performance, and isn't even enough to guarentee fork safty -- though it gets pretty close. BSD has a facility to zero a madvised page on fork which can be used for completely safe and fast fork detection, but linux doesn't have it yet. I suspect any such library is going to be a mess of non-portable subroutines. Which would be unfortun
1174 2016-01-28T20:05:57 *** rawdr has joined #bitcoin-dev
1175 2016-01-28T20:05:59 <gmaxwell> ate, -- I fear us having to maintain stuff thats safe/tested on many platforms (esp ones we don't care about for Core); and yet at the same time I've seen how our code gets reused and I don't really want to be the proximal cause of the next android RNG bug. :)
1176 2016-01-28T20:06:01 <wumpus> some of them require quite high performance; eg. where InsecureRandom is used right now, but we don't necessarily need to replace that
1177 2016-01-28T20:06:13 <gmaxwell> wumpus: yes, though except in the coin selection knapsack we really don't care about performance.
1178 2016-01-28T20:06:21 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
1179 2016-01-28T20:06:44 <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: but we don't need fortuna for knapsack.
1180 2016-01-28T20:07:04 <wumpus> fortuna is *fast* right?
1181 2016-01-28T20:07:16 <jonasschnelli> define *fast*. :)
1182 2016-01-28T20:08:00 <gmaxwell> There are degrees. Nothing that does PID checking on each call is fast enough for someone using it for call per packet for encryption IVs for (say) a dns server.
1183 2016-01-28T20:08:07 <wumpus> yes, I don't know, but in any case the important part is key generation for the wallet
1184 2016-01-28T20:08:34 <wumpus> e.g. an extra getpid() call per key won't make much of a difference there
1185 2016-01-28T20:08:40 <gmaxwell> (we have an existance proof that we don't need fast, openssl's is super slow)
1186 2016-01-28T20:09:29 <gmaxwell> or rather, we did need fast-- in the coin selection, and ... that doesn't use openssl, as it didn't need to be cryptographic.
1187 2016-01-28T20:09:48 <jonasschnelli> But long term: do we expect people generating keys on a "bitcoin-core machine"?
1188 2016-01-28T20:09:48 <wumpus> gmaxwell: exactly, where we need fast, we don't need much security
1189 2016-01-28T20:09:54 <petertodd> so, if we went with a faster, but not quite as secure generic library, and then used it with XOR read('/dev/urandom', 32) for the really critical wallet stuff, would that be ok?
1190 2016-01-28T20:09:58 *** drnet has joined #bitcoin-dev
1191 2016-01-28T20:10:07 <wumpus> where we need security, we don't need fast
1192 2016-01-28T20:10:40 <gmaxwell> petertodd: thats what I proposed on the PR. xoring with dev/urandom for key generation.
1193 2016-01-28T20:11:01 <wumpus> petertodd: makes sense
1194 2016-01-28T20:11:31 <gmaxwell> petertodd: my goal was to basically reduce the part that must be reviewed very carefully to only a couple lines.
1195 2016-01-28T20:11:34 <petertodd> gmaxwell: I know - I mean, would that be acceptable if we also used a somewhat less secure - but faster - generic library with it? basically, I'm saying, is that level of security acceptable for all the other things we need random numbers for?
1196 2016-01-28T20:12:13 <petertodd> gmaxwell: that approach might be the way to get back to something that's at least used by multiple parties outside of Bitcoin
1197 2016-01-28T20:12:43 <jonasschnelli> how do we handle Win32 /dev/urandom (CryptGenRandom?)
1198 2016-01-28T20:13:04 <petertodd> jonasschnelli: exactly - I guess we'd end up implementing about two or three separate OS-specific routines?
1199 2016-01-28T20:13:33 <wumpus> jonasschnelli: yes - that's similar to /dev/random/urandom
1200 2016-01-28T20:13:34 <jtimon> quick update on libconsensus for those interested: most stable branch (should only change for backports from master and nits) is in https://github.com/jtimon/bitcoin/commits/libconsensus-p2-A and contains the open PRs #7091 #7287 #7310 #7311 . libconsensus-p2-A contains the simplest refactorings and should be enough to do libconsensus-p3-A (expose verifyHeader). The longest branch is still WIP but I believe the C API *I* am going to
1201 2016-01-28T20:13:34 <jtimon> propose (but I really hope I can make things easy enough for other to propose their own variants) is more or less final [but the branch needs much cleaning up in the implementation] and can be seen in https://github.com/jtimon/bitcoin/commits/libconsensus-f3
1202 2016-01-28T20:13:48 <jonasschnelli> I think, longterm, we should prepare that entropy will be generated in tiny offline devices or additional chips in smartphone.
1203 2016-01-28T20:14:00 *** azm1 has quit IRC
1204 2016-01-28T20:14:01 <gmaxwell> petertodd: perhaps. There is also a schism over AES CTR based RNG (clearly fastest and most power efficient anywhere you have hardware AES) and chacha (fastest anywhere where there is no hardware AES).
1205 2016-01-28T20:14:28 <wumpus> jonasschnelli: in the long term, key storage as well as generation should move to some (either by means of software or hardware) isolated device, yes
1206 2016-01-28T20:14:43 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
1207 2016-01-28T20:14:51 <jtimon> by reviewing #7091 #7287 #7310 #7311 asap you help make https://github.com/jtimon/bitcoin/commits/libconsensus-f3 a more stable branch for people to propose their own final C APIs for libconsensus on top of
1208 2016-01-28T20:14:59 <gmaxwell> petertodd: but I don't think fork safty is really negoiable in a library.
1209 2016-01-28T20:15:00 <petertodd> gmaxwell: is that a pluggable option? IE, is everything but the AES vs. chacha the same?
1210 2016-01-28T20:15:29 <gmaxwell> petertodd: it could be, of course that kind of complexity is despised for good reason. :)
1211 2016-01-28T20:15:37 * jtimon remembers he still has to rename that branch s/f/p/ [fase vs phase]
1212 2016-01-28T20:15:45 <petertodd> gmaxwell: right, so some of these users would be happy to give that up, perhaps in exchange for it being a <foo>-specific codebase?
1213 2016-01-28T20:16:00 <petertodd> gmaxwell: yup
1214 2016-01-28T20:16:23 <jtimon> </review begging>
1215 2016-01-28T20:16:50 <petertodd> gmaxwell: have we considered making the RNG someone elses problem and using a cloud API for it? we could use micropayments to incentivise people to run the API
1216 2016-01-28T20:17:30 <wumpus> jtimon: cool, I'll take a look at your proposed conseneus API soon
1217 2016-01-28T20:17:49 <gmaxwell> lol
1218 2016-01-28T20:18:05 <gmaxwell> petertodd: "microservice" is the trendy name, I think.
1219 2016-01-28T20:18:16 <wumpus> hahahah
1220 2016-01-28T20:18:42 <petertodd> the tricky part, is ensuring the RNG microservice doesn't charge macro-level fees...
1221 2016-01-28T20:21:28 <jtimon> wumpus: great, as said is more unstable than p2 (just encapsulating stuff without exposing anything else), but you told me you were more interested on a candidate "final" C API to start reviewing that
1222 2016-01-28T20:22:26 *** tjader has quit IRC
1223 2016-01-28T20:24:08 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
1224 2016-01-28T20:26:01 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1225 2016-01-28T20:27:46 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
1226 2016-01-28T20:27:49 *** erasmospunk has quit IRC
1227 2016-01-28T20:29:47 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
1228 2016-01-28T20:31:37 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
1229 2016-01-28T20:31:51 *** ignit has joined #bitcoin-dev
1230 2016-01-28T20:32:05 *** btcaddict has quit IRC
1231 2016-01-28T20:33:57 *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
1232 2016-01-28T20:34:55 *** MarcoFalke_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1233 2016-01-28T20:36:14 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
1234 2016-01-28T20:36:54 <maaku> btcdrak I'm pushing a merger of Morcos work on top of #6312 tomorrow
1235 2016-01-28T20:37:16 *** MarcoFalke_ has quit IRC
1236 2016-01-28T20:37:23 <btcdrak> maaku: we decided to go with 7184
1237 2016-01-28T20:37:36 <btcdrak> and I have people testing it already
1238 2016-01-28T20:37:37 *** rmwb has quit IRC
1239 2016-01-28T20:38:32 <maaku> I think you misunderstood
1240 2016-01-28T20:39:07 <maaku> I'm merging Morcos approach on top of #6312's already reviewed commits
1241 2016-01-28T20:39:13 <maaku> This should get it out faster
1242 2016-01-28T20:39:55 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-dev
1243 2016-01-28T20:40:24 <btcdrak> maaku: No, I understood. We already discussed this at a previous meeting. the previous reviews arent meaningful because of all the changes that occurred over time. Thus it wont make it go out faster. In fact, it will slow things down now others are testing 7184
1244 2016-01-28T20:41:27 <btcdrak> what concerns me more for delay is if consensus refactoring requires more rebasing. As it stands 7184+6564 are trivially mergeable
1245 2016-01-28T20:42:22 *** kang_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1246 2016-01-28T20:44:15 *** bsm117532 has quit IRC
1247 2016-01-28T20:44:42 <maaku> 7184 is lacking sufficient reviews
1248 2016-01-28T20:45:00 <maaku> And had been for some time. This has been mentionable in the meetings
1249 2016-01-28T20:45:10 *** azm1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1250 2016-01-28T20:45:40 *** st0opkid has quit IRC
1251 2016-01-28T20:46:27 <maaku> 7184 is deficient in a number of ways as well, such as not notifying in the UI when a tx is sequence locked
1252 2016-01-28T20:49:11 <maaku> The meaningful difference between 6312 and 7184 is a minor refactoring
1253 2016-01-28T20:49:19 *** Ducky- has quit IRC
1254 2016-01-28T20:49:44 <maaku> But as written there is a bunch of other differences that would hold up release.
1255 2016-01-28T20:50:14 *** bsm117532 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1256 2016-01-28T20:50:37 *** earthris1 has quit IRC
1257 2016-01-28T20:50:53 *** earthrise has joined #bitcoin-dev
1258 2016-01-28T20:52:32 *** Virtuall_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1259 2016-01-28T20:52:40 *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-dev
1260 2016-01-28T20:53:59 <bsm117532> gmaxwell: please accept my apologies for mistyping last night. I should have said that your roadmap did not include a plan for *bandwidth*-based scaling. That, perhaps is something that could be addressed to set some people's minds at ease.
1261 2016-01-28T20:54:02 *** metalcamp_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1262 2016-01-28T20:55:26 *** VirtuallyLaw has quit IRC
1263 2016-01-28T20:56:27 <maaku> bsm117532 it absolutely does include plans for bandwidth based scaling.
1264 2016-01-28T20:57:26 *** metalcamp has quit IRC
1265 2016-01-28T20:58:19 <btcdrak> maaku: I am sorry you feel that way, 6312 is in no better state. There is a lot of testing work ongoing with 7184, an example of this is the functional tests that aj published. The tACKs are in progress and infact, one for 7184 was added today albeit only commented on 6564.
1266 2016-01-28T20:58:22 <bsm117532> maaku: Could you enlighten me? Because that's not what I read from the roadmap or the FAQ.
1267 2016-01-28T20:58:27 *** Giszmo has quit IRC
1268 2016-01-28T20:59:08 <maaku> btcdrak I'm not sure how those tests are specific to 7184
1269 2016-01-28T20:59:43 *** gmaxwell has left #bitcoin-dev
1270 2016-01-28T20:59:50 *** cryptapus_ has quit IRC
1271 2016-01-28T21:00:16 <maaku> bsm117532 read the logs. I don't have the patience to go through this yet again
1272 2016-01-28T21:00:28 <bsm117532> Greg's statement says only "Weâll continue to set the stage for non-bandwidth-increase-based
1273 2016-01-28T21:00:28 <bsm117532> scaling, while building additional tools that would make bandwidth
1274 2016-01-28T21:00:28 <bsm117532> increases safer long term".
1275 2016-01-28T21:02:00 *** natloz has quit IRC
1276 2016-01-28T21:02:02 <btcdrak> maaku: in any case, your supposition that somehow #6312 can get merged faster is not founded and certainly not the feeling of people reviewing. ACKs are coming for 7184, it is _being tested right now_ by LN guys for example. Just because the ticket looks inactive doesnt mean there isnt a ton of stuff going on in the background.
1277 2016-01-28T21:07:09 <bsm117532> maaku: you're talking about http://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/scalingbitcoin/hong-kong/a-flexible-limit-trading-subsidy-for-larger-blocks/ ?
1278 2016-01-28T21:11:30 *** blueness has joined #bitcoin-dev
1279 2016-01-28T21:12:12 *** markus-k_ has quit IRC
1280 2016-01-28T21:12:58 *** markus-k has joined #bitcoin-dev
1281 2016-01-28T21:13:33 *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1282 2016-01-28T21:14:30 *** kang_ has quit IRC
1283 2016-01-28T21:16:24 *** bsm117532 has left #bitcoin-dev
1284 2016-01-28T21:22:15 *** agricocb has quit IRC
1285 2016-01-28T21:22:38 *** patcon has joined #bitcoin-dev
1286 2016-01-28T21:27:33 <morcos> maaku: The removal of the GUI notification was something I specifically discussed on IRC
1287 2016-01-28T21:28:04 *** agricocb has joined #bitcoin-dev
1288 2016-01-28T21:28:06 <morcos> That was actually one of the larger problems with 6312, I believe the performance effect of that as written would have made the code entirely unusable
1289 2016-01-28T21:30:05 <morcos> On top of that, there is no regular use case in which sequence locked transactions would show up in the UI (b/c they wouldnt' make it into the mempool/wallet in the first place other than due to reorg)
1290 2016-01-28T21:30:41 <morcos> So it may be something that is worth solving correctly eventually, but I think it should be an additional improvement and isn't required for basic functionality
1291 2016-01-28T21:31:54 <morcos> I think whether reviewing 7184 as a standalone or on top of 6312 is a matter or preference, but personally I think that since it has been so long since much review has happened on 6312 and since 7184 actually removes a lot of code added in 6312, reviewing the simple squashed version is easier.
1292 2016-01-28T21:35:05 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
1293 2016-01-28T21:36:12 *** binns has quit IRC
1294 2016-01-28T21:39:29 *** rmwb has quit IRC
1295 2016-01-28T21:39:49 *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-dev
1296 2016-01-28T21:39:50 *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-dev
1297 2016-01-28T21:46:32 *** n0n0_ has quit IRC
1298 2016-01-28T21:47:35 *** azm1 has quit IRC
1299 2016-01-28T21:49:52 *** lianj has quit IRC
1300 2016-01-28T21:50:07 *** CheckDavid has joined #bitcoin-dev
1301 2016-01-28T21:50:57 *** moa has joined #bitcoin-dev
1302 2016-01-28T21:53:38 *** tjader has quit IRC
1303 2016-01-28T21:53:50 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
1304 2016-01-28T21:56:43 *** veggi3s has joined #bitcoin-dev
1305 2016-01-28T21:57:36 *** azm1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1306 2016-01-28T21:57:45 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1307 2016-01-28T21:57:53 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
1308 2016-01-28T21:58:49 *** idlederp has joined #bitcoin-dev
1309 2016-01-28T21:59:04 *** idlederp is now known as lianj
1310 2016-01-28T21:59:19 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
1311 2016-01-28T21:59:24 *** lianj has quit IRC
1312 2016-01-28T21:59:24 *** lianj has joined #bitcoin-dev
1313 2016-01-28T21:59:43 *** neozaru has joined #bitcoin-dev
1314 2016-01-28T22:02:36 *** jgarzik has quit IRC
1315 2016-01-28T22:03:46 *** zooko has joined #bitcoin-dev
1316 2016-01-28T22:03:51 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
1317 2016-01-28T22:04:30 *** Virtuall_ has quit IRC
1318 2016-01-28T22:05:35 *** neozaru has quit IRC
1319 2016-01-28T22:08:03 *** ninho has joined #bitcoin-dev
1320 2016-01-28T22:09:11 *** drnet has quit IRC
1321 2016-01-28T22:14:03 *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
1322 2016-01-28T22:14:38 *** Belxjander has quit IRC
1323 2016-01-28T22:14:49 *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-dev
1324 2016-01-28T22:15:35 *** segy has quit IRC
1325 2016-01-28T22:17:07 *** RoboTeddy has quit IRC
1326 2016-01-28T22:17:27 *** RoboTeddy has joined #bitcoin-dev
1327 2016-01-28T22:17:47 *** neozaru has joined #bitcoin-dev
1328 2016-01-28T22:19:02 *** segy has joined #bitcoin-dev
1329 2016-01-28T22:19:35 *** Belxjander has joined #bitcoin-dev
1330 2016-01-28T22:20:41 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
1331 2016-01-28T22:22:03 *** JeromeLegoupil has quit IRC
1332 2016-01-28T22:22:43 *** kgk has quit IRC
1333 2016-01-28T22:23:19 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
1334 2016-01-28T22:26:29 *** zzyzx has joined #bitcoin-dev
1335 2016-01-28T22:26:43 *** zzyzx is now known as Guest11957
1336 2016-01-28T22:27:05 *** BTC_Angler has joined #bitcoin-dev
1337 2016-01-28T22:27:43 *** tachys has quit IRC
1338 2016-01-28T22:30:02 *** roidster has quit IRC
1339 2016-01-28T22:30:13 *** Guest11957 is now known as roidster
1340 2016-01-28T22:30:43 *** roidster is now known as Guest90250
1341 2016-01-28T22:33:20 *** ThomasV has quit IRC
1342 2016-01-28T22:34:38 *** GAit has quit IRC
1343 2016-01-28T22:34:55 *** tantalum has quit IRC
1344 2016-01-28T22:36:07 *** tachys has joined #bitcoin-dev
1345 2016-01-28T22:37:29 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1346 2016-01-28T22:38:30 *** blur3d has joined #bitcoin-dev
1347 2016-01-28T22:42:15 *** JeromeLegoupil has joined #bitcoin-dev
1348 2016-01-28T22:42:36 *** ceejep has quit IRC
1349 2016-01-28T22:43:08 *** arowser has quit IRC
1350 2016-01-28T22:43:23 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-dev
1351 2016-01-28T22:44:31 *** guest21333 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1352 2016-01-28T22:49:52 *** guest21333 has quit IRC
1353 2016-01-28T22:50:07 *** guest21333 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1354 2016-01-28T22:51:51 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
1355 2016-01-28T22:52:03 *** tachys has quit IRC
1356 2016-01-28T22:52:36 *** markus-k has quit IRC
1357 2016-01-28T22:53:35 *** c-cex-yuriy has joined #bitcoin-dev
1358 2016-01-28T22:55:52 *** tachys has joined #bitcoin-dev
1359 2016-01-28T22:56:36 *** azm1 has quit IRC
1360 2016-01-28T22:59:11 *** blur3d has quit IRC
1361 2016-01-28T22:59:31 *** Ducky- has joined #bitcoin-dev
1362 2016-01-28T22:59:55 *** tachys has quit IRC
1363 2016-01-28T22:59:58 *** robink has quit IRC
1364 2016-01-28T23:00:37 *** robink_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1365 2016-01-28T23:01:37 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-dev
1366 2016-01-28T23:01:38 *** one_zero has joined #bitcoin-dev
1367 2016-01-28T23:01:58 *** Guest90250 is now known as roidster
1368 2016-01-28T23:05:47 *** metalcamp_ has quit IRC
1369 2016-01-28T23:07:54 *** neozaru has quit IRC
1370 2016-01-28T23:14:36 *** Altoidnerd1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1371 2016-01-28T23:20:04 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: possibly help with peer review? but still, maintaining non-priority in Core costs "1"; maintaining priority in either costs "2"; maintaining both separately costs "3" - so I am left with the option to either do more work to maintain both Core and LJR separately (in these areas), or just focus on LJR
1372 2016-01-28T23:20:35 <Luke-Jr> in the meantime, it means Core becomes even more inappropriate and harmful for mining use
1373 2016-01-28T23:21:19 <Luke-Jr> paveljanik: if such an announcement is made, then at the same time I would like my dissenting opinion to be included, and Bitcoin LJR notated for nodes/miners who wish to retain priority support
1374 2016-01-28T23:22:26 *** tjader has quit IRC
1375 2016-01-28T23:25:42 *** agricocb has quit IRC
1376 2016-01-28T23:27:32 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
1377 2016-01-28T23:29:01 *** Dizzle has quit IRC
1378 2016-01-28T23:29:18 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1379 2016-01-28T23:29:22 <Lightsword> Luke-Jr, I think right now priorityâs usefulness is mostly limited to manually added transactions(such as pool payouts), would it make sense to separate priority transactions from the normal mempool and simplify CNB to only iterate through priority before operating on the rest of the mempool?
1380 2016-01-28T23:30:01 *** skyzer has joined #bitcoin-dev
1381 2016-01-28T23:30:13 <skyzer> error code: -28
1382 2016-01-28T23:30:13 <skyzer> error message:
1383 2016-01-28T23:30:13 <skyzer> Verifying wallet...
1384 2016-01-28T23:30:21 <skyzer> what does this mean when I try to start my bitcoin core?
1385 2016-01-28T23:31:54 <skyzer> Does it mean RPC_IN_WARMUP = -28, //! Client still warming up ?
1386 2016-01-28T23:34:15 *** zooko has quit IRC
1387 2016-01-28T23:34:36 *** lsrp has joined #bitcoin-dev
1388 2016-01-28T23:39:10 *** Palsson has joined #bitcoin-dev
1389 2016-01-28T23:41:42 <Luke-Jr> Lightsword: what? that isn't the case at all.
1390 2016-01-28T23:42:11 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
1391 2016-01-28T23:42:56 <Luke-Jr> Lightsword: Somewhere around 5% of transactions get mined by priority
1392 2016-01-28T23:43:57 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
1393 2016-01-28T23:44:34 *** janko33 has quit IRC
1394 2016-01-28T23:44:36 *** GAit has quit IRC
1395 2016-01-28T23:45:08 <Lightsword> Luke-Jr, that many still? I thought most pools had disabled it by now
1396 2016-01-28T23:45:09 *** ninho has quit IRC
1397 2016-01-28T23:45:53 <Luke-Jr> Lightsword: dunno, I haven't updated my info for the latest blocks; but it serves very useful purposes, and pools ought to enable it
1398 2016-01-28T23:46:00 <Luke-Jr> there's really no excuse for disabling it
1399 2016-01-28T23:46:40 <sturles> Lightsword: Bitminter, for example, has prioritysize set to 500k.
1400 2016-01-28T23:47:03 <Lightsword> Luke-Jr, from an economical point of view why would a pool enable it?
1401 2016-01-28T23:47:21 <skyzer> If I deleted .lock file from .bitcoin file, may it have corrupted my bitcoin core?
1402 2016-01-28T23:47:34 <skyzer> .bitcoin folder*
1403 2016-01-28T23:47:40 <sturles> Some people think priority transactions automatically mean 0 fee transactions. In fact most priority transactions have a generous fee as well, so it doesn't matter much how you prioritize.
1404 2016-01-28T23:47:40 <skyzer> luke-jr, do you know?
1405 2016-01-28T23:47:51 <skyzer> It's production wallet and getting all kinds of exceptions, it's not coming back up
1406 2016-01-28T23:48:30 <Luke-Jr> Lightsword: because they have Bitcoin's interests in mind?
1407 2016-01-28T23:48:39 <sturles> Lightsword: Most spam has low priority. By promoting normal transactions over spam, they benefit bitcoin as a whole, and therefore generate value.
1408 2016-01-28T23:48:55 <Luke-Jr> Lightsword: lots of miners at least *claim* they do
1409 2016-01-28T23:49:01 <sturles> Makes perfect economic sense.
1410 2016-01-28T23:49:17 *** agricocb has joined #bitcoin-dev
1411 2016-01-28T23:49:18 <Luke-Jr> skyzer: it's not impossible
1412 2016-01-28T23:49:26 *** CheckDavid has quit IRC
1413 2016-01-28T23:49:30 *** lsrp has quit IRC
1414 2016-01-28T23:49:46 <Luke-Jr> skyzer: good thing you have wallet backups, eh?
1415 2016-01-28T23:49:55 <sturles> skyzer: Check your debug.log
1416 2016-01-28T23:50:28 *** job_ has quit IRC
1417 2016-01-28T23:50:34 <skyzer> yes, checking
1418 2016-01-28T23:50:38 <Lightsword> Luke-Jr, I think itâs a cost benefit thing at this point though where itâs probably not worth maintaining, I know the origional reasons for it but I donât think those are that important at this point
1419 2016-01-28T23:51:36 <skyzer> no clue what to do, wallet just doesn't start up, wallet.dat is 725mb big, saing verifying wallet, usually it took only 10 sec before
1420 2016-01-28T23:51:57 <skyzer> and also it removed the wallet.dat and renamed to wallet.1454023330.bak file and created new one
1421 2016-01-28T23:52:01 <skyzer> itself
1422 2016-01-28T23:52:08 <Lightsword> sturles, most spam is also low fee as well, isnât that enough?
1423 2016-01-28T23:52:25 <sturles> No.
1424 2016-01-28T23:52:54 <sturles> Many normal transactions are low fee as well.
1425 2016-01-28T23:53:17 <skyzer> if somebody knows the reason why it renamed wallet.dat into wallet.1454023330.bak itself?
1426 2016-01-28T23:53:39 <Luke-Jr> Lightsword: it is definitely worth maintaining, and I will incur the maintenance cost either way. maintaining *both* priority-less *and* priority-supported has a higher cost.
1427 2016-01-28T23:54:05 <Lightsword> Luke-Jr, can you maintain priority support without a significant performance degredation in CNB?
1428 2016-01-28T23:54:29 <Luke-Jr> Lightsword: that is already the case.
1429 2016-01-28T23:54:50 *** MRIO has quit IRC
1430 2016-01-28T23:54:50 <sturles> skyzer: Is the new wallet.dat increasing in size?
1431 2016-01-28T23:54:58 <skyzer> no, wallet is now down
1432 2016-01-28T23:55:01 <skyzer> bitcoin core is not starting
1433 2016-01-28T23:55:13 <skyzer> now getting this Error: Unable to start HTTP server. See debug log for details
1434 2016-01-28T23:55:21 <skyzer> 2016-01-28 23:54:27 Using 8 threads for script verification
1435 2016-01-28T23:55:21 <skyzer> 2016-01-28 23:54:27 scheduler thread start
1436 2016-01-28T23:55:21 <skyzer> 2016-01-28 23:54:27 Binding RPC on address :: port 8332 failed.
1437 2016-01-28T23:55:21 <skyzer> 2016-01-28 23:54:27 Binding RPC on address 0.0.0.0 port 8332 failed.
1438 2016-01-28T23:55:21 <skyzer> 2016-01-28 23:54:27 Unable to bind any endpoint for RPC server
1439 2016-01-28T23:55:21 <Lightsword> Luke-Jr, I thought enabling it would cause slowdowns in CNB with 0.12
1440 2016-01-28T23:55:27 <Luke-Jr> Lightsword: not significant
1441 2016-01-28T23:55:32 <Luke-Jr> maybe a few nanoseconds
1442 2016-01-28T23:55:36 <sturles> skyzer: You have another bitcoind running.
1443 2016-01-28T23:56:01 *** lsrp has joined #bitcoin-dev
1444 2016-01-28T23:56:08 <skyzer> bitcoind: scheduler.cpp:19: CScheduler::~CScheduler(): Assertion `nThreadsServicingQueue == 0' failed.
1445 2016-01-28T23:56:08 <Luke-Jr> Lightsword: priority is cached, and mempool size limited, so it's a simple sort
1446 2016-01-28T23:56:15 <skyzer> this one, no bitcoind is running
1447 2016-01-28T23:56:40 <sturles> skyzer: netstat -lnp | grep :8332
1448 2016-01-28T23:57:32 <skyzer> It's there. still verifying wallet when trying to do bitcoin-cli getinfo
1449 2016-01-28T23:57:35 <skyzer> error code -28
1450 2016-01-28T23:59:27 <sturles> I would think it was doing some kind of wallet recovery or format update, but in that case the new wallet.dat should increase in size. Unless you killed the process doing the recovery, of course.
1451 2016-01-28T23:59:58 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev