BIP148 temporary service bit (1 << 27)
3 messages, 19 Jun 2017. Started by Luke Dashjr.
Luke Dashjr, Tom Zander, Mark F
To ease the transition to BIP148 and to minimise risks in the event miners choose to perform a chain split attack, at least Bitcoin Knots will be using the temporary service bit (1 << 27) to indicate BIP148 support.
Once the transition is complete, this will no longer be necessary, and the bit will be (manually) returned for reuse.
I encourage other software implementing BIP148 (both full and light nodes) to set and use this service bit to avoid network partitioning risks.
Luke
On Monday, 19 June 2017 21:26:22 CEST Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote:
Quoted text (9 lines)
> To ease the transition to BIP148 and to minimise risks in the event miners > choose to perform a chain split attack, at least Bitcoin Knots will be > using the temporary service bit (1 << 27) to indicate BIP148 support. > > Once the transition is complete, this will no longer be necessary, and the > bit will be (manually) returned for reuse. > > I encourage other software implementing BIP148 (both full and light nodes) > to set and use this service bit to avoid network partitioning risks.
I'm curious what you action on the finding (or not) of a peer with this bit set (or not). Can you link to the github commit where you implemented this?
It is essential that BIP-148 nodes connect to at least two other BIP-148 nodes to prevent a network partition in August 1st. The temporary service but is how such nodes are able to detect each other.
Quoted text (24 lines)
> On Jun 19, 2017, at 12:46 PM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org> wrote: > >> On Monday, 19 June 2017 21:26:22 CEST Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote: >> To ease the transition to BIP148 and to minimise risks in the event miners >> choose to perform a chain split attack, at least Bitcoin Knots will be >> using the temporary service bit (1 << 27) to indicate BIP148 support. >> >> Once the transition is complete, this will no longer be necessary, and the >> bit will be (manually) returned for reuse. >> >> I encourage other software implementing BIP148 (both full and light nodes) >> to set and use this service bit to avoid network partitioning risks. > > I'm curious what you action on the finding (or not) of a peer with this bit > set (or not). > Can you link to the github commit where you implemented this? > -- > Tom Zander > Blog: https://zander.github.io > Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev