Bitcoiners: In the literal sense...
Would you run a Bitcoin Core patch that disconnects v1 peers and only keeps BIP324 (v2 transport) peers?
It advertises NODE_P2P_V2, drops outbound v1 peers, drops relay peers using v1, and drops peers claiming v2 support while connecting via v1.
I think it's exactly what the network needs to speed BIP324 adoption, but I could be wrong.
Replies (5)
A quick check of my well connected nodes shows a nearly even split of v1 and v2 peers.
I guess we need not worry about this causing a network partition because not many folks would bother doing it.
Yep, majority of people aren't even reachable. Im not worried about 50% of the node runners changing any settings.
V1 spy nodes tend to reconnect very aggressively. As soon as I disconnect they try reconnecting. It's annoying.
(which is why this patch only logs what its doing if net debugging is enabled.. otherwise it's too chatty)
~how many peers should a node aim to have??
I have less 10 channels now (peaked around 30).. But I only same number of peers as channels... Should I add more peers? TIA
Sounds good..
Enjoyed your rants on WBD BTW... I not a coder, but L D Jr has always seemed dodgy to me..
Plus typically I have very little expectations from anyone that believes The Bible...
Can't verify don't trust
