📅 Original date posted:2014-05-25
📝 Original message:>
> There
> is no need to have Bitcoin transport all using a single protocol, and
> we can get better robustness and feature velocity if there are a
> couple protocols in use (you could just run a block-transport-protocol
> daemon that connects to your local node via the classic protocol).
Although this is a somewhat appealing notion, would it really improve
feature velocity? I don't think the current p2p protocol is holding
anything back, and having to implement features twice in two protocols
would slow things down quite a bit.
Probably the lowest hanging fruit now is fixing the 100msec sleep and just
generally having tools to measure latency and queuing inside the code.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140525/61868344/attachment.html>;
Mike Hearn [ARCHIVE] /
npub17t…4qgyd
2023-06-07 15:22:05
in reply to nevent1q…w8zl
Author Public Key
npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgydPublished at
2023-06-07 15:22:05Event JSON
{
"id": "e9d07f3c894730021872420fa8ce132b3bf19cf91bdd508c47eb2999124ca4e2",
"pubkey": "f2c95df3766562e3b96b79a0254881c59e8639f23987846961cf55412a77f6f2",
"created_at": 1686151325,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"db0c94828eb521bd60e5a762540ad2fb3c4dc34552a9817c80dbbcb4c4cf34fe",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"daea070cd72d2bc4ef3c194bee5b2c47e8907e84e45d24fc46a2d4506ee80aa6",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"86f42bcb76a431c128b596c36714ae73a42cae48706a9e5513d716043447f5ec"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-05-25\n📝 Original message:\u003e\n\u003e There\n\u003e is no need to have Bitcoin transport all using a single protocol, and\n\u003e we can get better robustness and feature velocity if there are a\n\u003e couple protocols in use (you could just run a block-transport-protocol\n\u003e daemon that connects to your local node via the classic protocol).\n\n\nAlthough this is a somewhat appealing notion, would it really improve\nfeature velocity? I don't think the current p2p protocol is holding\nanything back, and having to implement features twice in two protocols\nwould slow things down quite a bit.\n\nProbably the lowest hanging fruit now is fixing the 100msec sleep and just\ngenerally having tools to measure latency and queuing inside the code.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140525/61868344/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "06f4aa8b88dd81c182bd6f43e511cb49aab2e887bd2f97474ed4dfe40e931d34129b817d039bd6fcdf6b92486f444ab852d643ffbfc709176d2dc513b1a023a1"
}