Topic: "Differentiate Protocol version from client version" - denied? - page 2. (Read 7958 times)

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification

Also, it's important that the client has no problem running on any arbitrary port. I tried to change the default port to have a mainnet and testnet client on the same box but the non-standard port client didn't get any connections. Maybe it's me that did something wrong, jsut saying.

Aren't a bunch of node IPs already harcoded in the client ? (haven't got a clue about this one, but could be a good temporary fallback)

IIRC jgarzik was arguing that the protocol version could be differentiated using a set of flags instead and that the protocol version field should be frozen, can't find that pull request anymore :/

EDIT : That was in OPs post... Protocol extension is different than protocol versioning, I think gavin should stand up

Absolutely correct that the protocol must be hammered out ASAP.

Satoshi did the crucial work of getting the reference implementation out. This fooling around with minor client changes is a waste of valuable time. More important are protocol adjustments which will strengthen the network and consistent documentation. Many different clients will follow once the documentation exists.

Obvious adjustments: perhaps consider SSL-encrypted connections (we had best anticipate the blocking of bitcoin connections by states/ISPs). IRC bootstrapping looks way too much like botnet activity and may easily be stopped by ISPs. Those kinds of steps would make things much easier and prevent the obvious "bumps in the road" that Gavin keeps mentioning.

Also, there is no manual for bitcoind. Documentation is an obvious requirement.

I am grateful for all the work that you are doing on bitcoin, and I didn't mean to say that you are power-hungry developer.

However, it is frustrating to see how the issue of separating the protocol version from the client version was rejected in this Github issue without any clear explanation.

Well, that document and the Wiki differs somewhat. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification.
Also, that text document says that the version "When a node receives an incoming connection, it will immediately advertise its version." which I think is no longer valid. What is the point of having the documentation if it is not up to date?

Also, the bootstrapping documentation is nowhere as far as I know. There are some pieces here and there but nothing that solid.

What I would like to see is something like a feed that describes all protocol changes and what motivated them. If I am to build an alternative client I want the core developers to know that it is a PITA to follow protocol changes and keep them to a minimum. Do not misunderstand me, I am all for evolvement and such, but I would like a real discussion (mailinglist anyone? bitcoin-protocol-dev?) before making anything permanent forever.

I think that using a separate protocol version will help facilitate the "keep the protocol stable" thought and also dot introduce protocol versions where the actual protocol are the same. For example, did you change anything between 32100 and 32200? As far as I know nothing P2P was changed (a bit bootstrapping though) - a protocol version increase here is accordingly to be totally uncalled for and only confuses developers.

 

I guess this is kinda on-topic: http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/2011/05/19/reference-implementations/

Really?  I've been encouraging alternative implementations, who is the power-hungry core developer?
Ok.  Start here:  https://github.com/bitcoin/netspec
Or here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Category:Technical

The issue as I understand it is that Satoshi's implementation in C++ is considered the reference implementation, and the protocol is defined by it, hence the coupling between the protocol version and client version. Besides, despite bitcoin now being a multi-million economy, the protocol is still not fully documented, and no production ready alternative implementations exist for that reason. Bitcoin is still considered beta software, and the protocol is supposedly still evolving. Additionally, Satoshi's code is so complex that nobody really knows if the current protocol covers all the code paths in his implementation.

I also think that a lot of the core developers are opposed to alternative implementations as that will dilute their power over the bitcoin network.  

I personally believe that we should have a simple and clearly defined protocol as soon as possible, and encourage a proliferation of alternative clients.

Hello.

I couldn't find any other thread for this issue so here goes.

The following pull request was denied a while ago. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/63
I would like to take it up for discussion since I know I am not alone to feel that it is a central thing to have the protocol version != client version.

Surely the other client makers out there can agree that this is a necessary thing?