Is gossip protocol in Bitcoin perfect? - page 2.

aliashraf

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1177

Always remember the cause!

Quote from: gmaxwell on December 26, 2018, 12:07:52 PM

Fibre is a protocol, not a service (and certainly not a centralized service). It's like you're calling Linux a centralized service because amazon runs it.

Bad analogy. Cheesy

If it was a requirement for Linux to be hosted in a data center, it would fit in such a category. It is not the case for Linux but for FIBRE, almost, it is.

One needs to setup a relay network of nodes that trust each other, to eliminate as much as possible hopes, thereafter this network is used by bitcoin nodes just as a service.

My point is you can't eliminate hopes and reduce the distance between bitcoin nodes, without giving-up with crucial bitcoin p2p relay network features. This is why you need to keep legacy protocol running, no matter what.

gmaxwell

staff

Activity: 4326

Merit: 8951

Quote from: bobthegrownup on December 25, 2018, 10:10:04 PM

I know BloxRoute is a solution that Bitcoin could adopt,

BloxRoute appears to be a straight up ICO scam as far as I can tell-- It doesn't appear to propose anything new or interesting that would be and advance over what is in use in the network today, but uses a lot of hype and jargon to try to sound new and exciting.

Then again googling around suggests the thing you claim to be working on is a competing ICO scam. ... and presumably you only posted here to hype it-- especially since your post is offtopic from the thread. Sad

Quote

complementary centralized services like above project

Fibre is a protocol, not a service (and certainly not a centralized service). It's like you're calling Linux a centralized service because amazon runs it.

aliashraf

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1177

Always remember the cause!

BlockStream has launched a satellite service that is streaming bitcoin transactions and blocks in a push protocol (no up-link needed).
FIBRE is a more sophisticated system mainly focused on miners an alternative is Bitcoin Relay Network and there are more similar projects to mention ...

I think bitcoin legacy P2P protocol is an infrastructure that should be kept almost intact for security purposes because of its decentralized nature. complementary centralized services like above projects seem to be auditible by using original p2p protocol simultaneously s a reference data. For instance it would be hard for a centralized relay service to censor transactions because of original protocol being active simultaneously and once a service has shown patterns of such behaviors, would be identified and isolated eventually.

bobthegrownup

member

Activity: 194

Merit: 29

Gossip is extremely redundant, and thats why its been around since the 1980's. Just like an epidemic, it eventually spreads everywhere, even if there is unsuspected downtime in nodes.

I'm still learning alot about it now that im working with the Marlin Protocol, and I've learned that Gossip is quite likely one of the biggest bottlenecks in scaling blockchains since it affects the networking layer. By using cut-through routing, FEC, IP multicast, and more, we can improve on the speed of these communications

I know BloxRoute is a solution that Bitcoin could adopt, but the likelihood that we move onto a centralized solution is zero. Marlin's decentralized proposition is something that we could slowly migrate to, but its something that wont happen tomorrow. Even Dandelion++ has yet to be implemented and it's a very small upgrade on Gossip.

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

There is no such guarantee that your transaction will reach all nodes, nor is it possible to really measure the time it takes nor is it possible to really check whether a transaction has reached all nodes.

Nodes come online and offline continuously, so some nodes that just came online probably do not have your transaction. Other nodes may be configured in such a way that your transaction is not relayed by them, so they don't have your transaction (not relaying directly implies not accepting it into their mempool).

the_big_feet

newbie

Activity: 14

Merit: 4

With bitcoin's gossip protocol, could we take for granted that if I sent transaction, for example, at 1:00 PM on 1st January 2018 UTC then every node connected to network from 1:00 PM to let's say (for network latency) 1:05 PM 1st January 2018 would receive that transaction, because of how the gossip protocol works? And by everyone I mean completely every node that was connected at that time to the network? Or maybe my transaction could not reach some node(s) for some reason and why?
Given some time for network latency, do messages reach absolutely all connected peers and how long it takes for them to do that?

Topic: Is gossip protocol in Bitcoin perfect? - page 2. (Read 859 times)