💬 tdb3 commented on pull request "test: Add explicit onion bind to p2p_permissions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30805#discussion_r1744664964)
nit: adding a comment explaining the reason the line was added could help prevent regression in the future.

e.g.
```
# explicitly bind the tor port to prevent collision with the default port
```

💬 ariard commented on pull request "Halt processing of unrequested transactions v2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30572#issuecomment-2330411726)
@gmaxwell

> Huh? Nothing here changes at all what transactions a node relays. And someone can always waste bandwidth to you if thats their only goal (e.g. sending you IP ping packets ).

> In any case, I'm only concerned about the shortest path to deploy-- since the behavior change could be made initially lax and then tightened over time. Right now, existing bitcoin core nodes are foolishly making many duplicate reque> sts. It's clear that this could be improved, but it seems like some will
...

🤔 tdb3 reviewed a pull request: "test: Add coverage for dumptxoutset failure robustness"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30817#pullrequestreview-2281665391)
Approach ACK

Nice addition. Definitely don't network broken from a failed RPC.
Keeping the PR scoped to just `NetworkDisable` seems good (more concise to reviewers).

💬 tdb3 commented on pull request "test: Add coverage for dumptxoutset failure robustness":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30817#discussion_r1744674413)
Could use `node.blocks_path` instead of `node.chain_path` for these two lines.

💬 ariard commented on pull request "Halt processing of unrequested transactions v2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30572#issuecomment-2330427591)
> I think the mass connector concern would be potentially addressable by doing something like, "if a peer sends an unsolicited txn stop all processing on the peer for N seconds" (h/t to Pieter for mentioning that in an off-thread disc> ussion).

I don't think it is that easy...a peer can be the fastest to announce a seen-by-all network txid, get requests from the node
and then inject an unsolicited tx to stop all processing, to force the node to fallback to another peer to fetch the seen-by-
...

💬 furszy commented on pull request "wallet: optimize migration process, batch db transactions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28574#discussion_r1744714899)
pushed.

💬 ariard commented on pull request "Halt processing of unrequested transactions v2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30572#issuecomment-2330483767)
Updated at [23551ef] with the `NODE_TXRELAY_V2` approach.

Submitted a BIP [draft](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30572/commits/23551efc912f912c2ccedde9b6518854dad7aac9) in that sense, in the lack for now of a better approach for now on how to implement reject of unrequested transactions in a minimally-disruptive fashion for the bitcoin peer-to-peer network. I think I should open a distinct PR for the service signaling support itself.

💬 garlonicon commented on issue "Testnet4 consensus failure due to timewarp related "softfork"":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30786#issuecomment-2330506782)
> unsure how to get to the main chain

You are on the main chain. But the deep reorg didn't kick in yet, so if you use for example mempool.space to see, if you are on the main chain or not, then that page is still showing the old chain. I guess it can take a few days to get there, but we are getting closer and closer, to trigger that reorg.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Add coverage for dumptxoutset failure robustness":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30817#discussion_r1744793926)
style nit: Pathlib should have the corresponding call as a member method. Using that would avoid the `os` import.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Reintroduce external signer support for Windows":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29868#discussion_r1744801683)
Please don't re-introduce https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30608

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Use std::span and std::string_view for raw data":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30796#discussion_r1744806538)
> What does the `detail_` prefix mean?

It is just the lazy version of `namespace detail`, see https://duckduckgo.com/?q=namespace+detail or `git grep "namespace detail"` to denote internal details that should not be considered exposed.

Happy to wrap the symbol into a `namespace detail` properly.

💬 russeree commented on issue "Testnet4 consensus failure due to timewarp related "softfork"":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30786#issuecomment-2330612837)
> > My question is why did we merge code into Core that forked T4 without contacting any of the larger swaths of hashrate and or having the HR to outrun the previously canonical chain?
>
> There was no indication at the time that anyone would mine blocks that were outside of MAX_TIMEWARP of 600. And generally, the assumption is that if someone is running code from an unmerged PR, they should be following it and be aware that it might majorly change before it is merged.
>
> Also, it's testn
...

💬 jadijadi commented on issue "btc":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29562#issuecomment-2330639061)
what is this? any more info?

💬 TheCharlatan commented on issue "build: reproducibility issue with macOS Guix builds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30815#issuecomment-2330640392)
They seem to be, yes.

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "kernel: Create usable static kernel library":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30814#issuecomment-2330655804)
Re-worked this, it now installs all the required libraries when the static kernel lib is being built. Couldn't figure out why the previous method was working on my machines, but not in the CI container. Since it is not a standard thing to do (just about touching undefined behaviour territory), and some reviewers commented they would support installing all libraries as an alternative, this now seems like the better and future-proof solution to me.

✅ maflcko closed an issue: "btc"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29562)

👋 TheCharlatan's pull request is ready for review: "kernel: Create usable static kernel library"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30814)

:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "btc"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29562)

💬 garlonicon commented on issue "Testnet4 consensus failure due to timewarp related "softfork"":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30786#issuecomment-2330694091)
Also, we can now clearly see, why weak blocks are needed: mempool.space shows more than 500 transactions, waiting for being confirmed, but only a few of them are really mined, and the rest is waiting patiently, because nobody rebroadcasted them.

And there is more: it is possible to easily double-spend them, because it will take some time, before they will be shared in P2P way.

It is also something to consider, in case when mempools are congested: if you can see a miner, sending blocks with
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "signet: fixing mining for OP_TRUE challenge":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29032#issuecomment-2330721828)
Rebased after #28417.