Author: Matt Corallo 2012-10-24 19:00:33
Published on: 2012-10-24T19:00:33+00:00
During a discussion on sharing parts of the merkle branches when returning a 'merkleblock', Gavin Andresen suggested that complicating the BIP for what should be a rare case is not necessary. He also expressed concern over requiring serving/relaying nodes to keep track of which transactions they have or have not sent to their peers, stating that it could potentially lead to some kind of DoS attack. However, Matt argued that requiring an extra 'inv' round-trip would be more vulnerable to DoS attacks as it would require nodes to store each transaction that could be requested instead of just forwarding them automatically. The reference client currently keeps track of announced/sent transactions, but even this implementation does not fully comply with the BIP as stated.
Updated on: 2023-05-19T15:59:08.508608+00:00