In the short-term, maybe. Keep in mind that the code for tx relay is fairly different and the bandwidth for transaction relay on these nodes is already lower than it is for blocks (by design). That said, I'd like to look into doing tx-less block relays for transactions that peers already have to limit block relay times even for large blocks, in which case tx relay is very much required.
Matt On 11/13/13 15:13, John Dillon wrote: > You should split the block-only and block+tx not only by port > number, but also by DNS address. DoS attack by flooding blocks is > fundamentally more difficult than DoS attack by flooding > transctions, so doing the split by IP address ensures that in the > event of an attack the more important block relaying functionality > is less likely to be damaged. In the meantime point both DNS > addresses to the same IP until it becomes an issue. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DreamFactory - Open Source REST & JSON Services for HTML5 & Native Apps OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access Free app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server. Sign up and see examples for AngularJS, jQuery, Sencha Touch and Native! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63469471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
