[Bitcoin-development] Feedback requested: "reject" p2p message

Pieter Wuille pieter.wuille at gmail.com
Mon Oct 28 03:02:18 UTC 2013


Categories that make sense to me:
1) protocol related problems
1.a) failed to deserialize transaction
2) core principle violations
2.a) script evaluation fail (only owner is allowed to spend)
2.b) outputs larger than inputs (no creation of new money)
2.c) outputs not found/already spent (no double spending)
3) policy rules
3.a) not standard
3.b) ...

-- 
Pieter
 On Oct 27, 2013 11:54 PM, "Gavin Andresen" <gavinandresen at gmail.com> wrote:

> RE: use HTTP-like status codes:
>
> Okey dokey, I'll add a one-byte machine-readable HTTP-like status code.
> Unless y'all want a 32-bit status code.  Or maybe a varint. Or a
> three-character numeric string. I really and truly don't care, but I am
> writing this code right now so whatever you want, decide quickly.
>
> If anybody has strong feelings about what the reject categories should be,
> then please take the time to write a specific list, I can't read your
> mind....
>
>
> --
> --
> Gavin Andresen
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> October Webinars: Code for Performance
> Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance.
> Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most
> from
> the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register >
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131028/5b79e959/attachment.html>


More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list