21:00:16 <jnewbery_> #startmeeting 21:00:17 <core-meetingbot> Meeting started Tue Jun 15 21:00:16 2021 UTC. The chair is jnewbery_. Information about MeetBot at https://bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch/ircmeetings. 21:00:17 <core-meetingbot> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick 21:00:23 <jnewbery_> #bitcoin -core-dev Meeting: achow101 aj amiti ariard bluematt cfields Chris_Stewart_5 digi_james dongcarl elichai2 emilengler fanquake fjahr gleb glozow gmaxwell gwillen hebasto instagibbs jamesob jb55 jeremyrubin jl2012 jnewbery jonasschnelli jonatack jtimon kallewoof kanzure kvaciral lightlike luke-jr maaku marcofalke meshcollider michagogo moneyball morcos nehan NicolasDorier paveljanik 21:00:29 <jnewbery_> petertodd phantomcircuit promag provoostenator ryanofsky sdaftuar sipa vasild wumpus 21:00:34 <amiti> hi 21:00:40 <ariard> yo 21:00:45 <lightlike> hi 21:00:58 <michaelfolkson> hi 21:01:07 <jnewbery_> Hi folks. We have two items on the agenda today: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/P2P-IRC-meetings#15-jun-2021 21:01:11 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15 | Option to specify external IP address ÷ Issue #15 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 21:01:12 <jnewbery_> Does anyone have any last minute topics to add? 21:02:11 <jnewbery_> ok, let's get started on the topics 21:02:24 <jnewbery_> #topic locking in net_processing 21:02:25 <core-meetingbot> topic: locking in net_processing 21:02:39 <_aj_> hi 21:03:16 <sipa> hi 21:03:23 <jnewbery_> #21527 is currently waiting for review. It adds a new lock to PeerMan, which I think later can be used to replace all the usage of cs_main in net_processing. 21:03:28 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21527 | net_processing: lock clean up by ajtowns ÷ Pull Request #21527 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 21:03:51 <jnewbery_> It'd unblock a lot of work to modularize net_processing and enforce clearer interfaces with validation and net 21:04:09 <glozow> hi 21:04:41 <jnewbery_> The PR is languishing a bit and had some pushback from vasild, but I think it's probably the right direction to take 21:06:01 <ariard> doesn't sound to big, i can have a look on it this week 21:06:19 <jnewbery_> Thanks ariard 21:07:04 <amiti> I'm a concept / approach ACK on the pr. I intend to review it, hopefully soon 21:07:32 <michaelfolkson> Seems like vasild can give an ACK (with reservations) from his comments which might help it along too 21:08:31 <jnewbery_> ok, if there aren't any questions on the approach, then we can move on to the next topic 21:08:51 <jnewbery_> #topic Reduce addr blackholes 21:08:52 <core-meetingbot> topic: Reduce addr blackholes 21:08:56 <jnewbery_> (amiti) 21:09:34 <amiti> hi! I brought #21528 out of draft this week, and opened #22245 as a small change I'd like to see in v22 21:09:37 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21528 | [p2p] Reduce addr blackholes by amitiuttarwar ÷ Pull Request #21528 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 21:09:39 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22245 | [p2p] Stop sending SENDADDRV2 message to block-relay-only peers by amitiuttarwar ÷ Pull Request #22245 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 21:10:21 <amiti> the biggest concern about 21528 was around compatibility of other software on the network, and I looked at every client I could, opened issues confirming my understanding, posted on mailing list, mentioned it here multiple times... so I feel like its okay to move forward with these changes :) 21:10:52 <sipa> so the policy is going to be "if you ever send anything addr related, we assume you care about addresses"? 21:11:13 <amiti> yeah 21:11:25 <amiti> updated from "we assume you care about addresses regardless" 21:13:47 <amiti> and then there was a question about BIP155 on #22245, I've posted my thoughts on the PR, but want to give anyone the chance to raise questions / any remaining concerns 21:13:48 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22245 | [p2p] Stop sending SENDADDRV2 message to block-relay-only peers by amitiuttarwar ÷ Pull Request #22245 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 21:14:58 <amiti> ok, if not, this is just an update then :) 21:15:05 <lightlike> #22245 would make sendaddrv2 kind of non-parallel with the other feature negotiation message wtxidrelay (which must be send regardless of whether we do tx relay) 21:15:06 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22245 | [p2p] Stop sending SENDADDRV2 message to block-relay-only peers by amitiuttarwar ÷ Pull Request #22245 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 21:15:09 <lightlike> not sure if consistency something that is valuable at this spot though 21:16:00 <sipa> i don't think so 21:16:01 <amiti> lightlike: why must wtxidrelay be sent regardless of tx relay? 21:16:13 <sipa> if you don't care about addresses, sending sendaddrv2 is just irrelevant 21:16:33 <lightlike> "The wtxidrelay message MUST be sent in response to a version message from a peer whose protocol version is >= 70016 and prior to sending a verack" (BIP 339) 21:16:34 <sipa> so presumably, someone who doesn't care about addresses at all is not going to send it 21:16:39 <ariard> sounds more an oddity of bip339 21:16:44 <amiti> lightlike: ah, gotcha 21:17:01 <sipa> in order to implement BIP339 you must send wtxidrelay 21:17:06 <sipa> but you're free not to implement BIP339 21:18:00 <sipa> someone who doesn't care about addrv2 isn't going to implement BIP155, and thus isn't going to send sendaddrv2 either? 21:18:07 <jnewbery_> lightlike: that MUST means "you must send it if you want the peer to relay transactions using wtxid". I disagreed with using that language at the time because I thought it was confusing. 21:18:17 <sipa> (which also applies to anyone who doesn't care about addresses in the first place) 21:19:07 <lightlike> jnewbery_: ah, ok, then it is not an issue. 21:20:27 <michaelfolkson> What's the latest on #21061 amiti? Is the new approach finalized/agreed or is it still up in the air somewhat? 21:20:30 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21061 | [p2p] Introduce node rebroadcast module by amitiuttarwar ÷ Pull Request #21061 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 21:21:03 <michaelfolkson> I read the Suhas comments 21:21:03 <amiti> michaelfolkson: still working on it, I'll post an update on the PR when its more concrete 21:21:18 <michaelfolkson> Cool 21:21:23 <amiti> ok, I guess that concludes the Reduce addr blackholes topic 21:21:33 <jnewbery_> thanks amiti 21:21:43 <ariard> w.r.t to erlay, gleb should release the new version of the simulator this week 21:21:55 <ariard> and down to review more minisketch once i'm done with the current package-PRs 21:22:55 <jnewbery_> ariard: good to hear that it's still being worked on! 21:23:12 <jnewbery_> ok, any last updates before we end the meeting? 21:23:38 <jnewbery_> #endmeeting