📅 Original date posted:2013-03-12
📝 Original message:On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:10:47AM +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:
> However, most nodes are not running in such a loop today. Probably
> almost no nodes are.
>
> I suppose you could consider mass node death to be more benign than a
> hard fork, but both are pretty damn serious and warrant immediate
> action. Otherwise we're going to see the number of nodes drop sharply
> over the coming days as unattended nodes die and then don't get
> restarted.
I'm sure if "mass node death" becomes an issue miners will have plenty
of incentive to temporarily, or permanently, setup some high-memory and
high-bandwidth nodes to accept transactions. The DNS seeds sort by
reliability so it won't be long before nodes are connecting to them.
My home machine has 16GB of ram, bigger than the whole blockchain.
--
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20130312/2505f7cd/attachment.sig>;
Peter Todd [ARCHIVE] /
npub1m2…a2np2
2023-06-07 11:36:53
in reply to nevent1q…kykk
Author Public Key
npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2Published at
2023-06-07 11:36:53Event JSON
{
"id": "66aabea9f00f8e18bba715f3ed6e071b8ed7e37555f68dec384db602a718fec1",
"pubkey": "daa2fc676a25e3b5b45644540bcbd1e1168b111427cd0e3cf19c56194fb231aa",
"created_at": 1686137813,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"bf6db92ac74ed2040908c22a007eaccc4dacca3e534709bcb8876ea849933631",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"7e86fd5ced8ba850537cf0e089fcbb7beda40b7e27bfc46450803420226844c1",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f2c95df3766562e3b96b79a0254881c59e8639f23987846961cf55412a77f6f2"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2013-03-12\n📝 Original message:On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:10:47AM +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:\n\u003e However, most nodes are not running in such a loop today. Probably\n\u003e almost no nodes are.\n\u003e \n\u003e I suppose you could consider mass node death to be more benign than a\n\u003e hard fork, but both are pretty damn serious and warrant immediate\n\u003e action. Otherwise we're going to see the number of nodes drop sharply\n\u003e over the coming days as unattended nodes die and then don't get\n\u003e restarted.\n\nI'm sure if \"mass node death\" becomes an issue miners will have plenty\nof incentive to temporarily, or permanently, setup some high-memory and\nhigh-bandwidth nodes to accept transactions. The DNS seeds sort by\nreliability so it won't be long before nodes are connecting to them.\n\nMy home machine has 16GB of ram, bigger than the whole blockchain.\n\n-- \n'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 490 bytes\nDesc: Digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20130312/2505f7cd/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "97e26430edbd22f391d66205cf976885e3733cf1fe88c177a23b4f153aaead3a38b3acd8aca6408e905a7e423fd0c3b9d0c31504ef4b22f8448e74d6cd77483b"
}