Author: Christian Decker 2018-02-28 21:38:01
Published on: 2018-02-28T21:38:01+00:00
In a message thread, Olaoluwa Osuntokun discusses the issue of appending additional fields to the 'innit' message. He argues that it already contains two variable-sized fields and adding more would make it difficult to remove or nullify expected messages in the future. However, he agrees that a new message with high and low watermarks for a sync controlled by the recipient is needed. Christian disagrees and believes extending the 'innit' message is useful and may be necessary in the future. He points out that the two variable size fields are length-prefixed, making it easy to identify any new fields added to the end. However, he acknowledges that the recipient must understand the new field, which cannot be skipped. He also addresses overflow concerns, stating that a single features bitfield is enough to overflow the 'init' message length. Christian suggests that the 'init' message can contain the global and local features, as well as the low and high watermarks, and shares a possible format for the message. Overall, there is a disagreement on whether to extend the 'innit' message or create a new one for syncing purposes.
Updated on: 2023-05-24T20:37:31.015680+00:00