Bitcoin Core CJDNS Debate: Who Reported Low Peer Count?
CryptoSlate and Coindoo both cover the same GitHub debate over CJDNS support in Bitcoin Core but credit the low-peer-count observation to different developers.
CryptoSlate and Coindoo both cover the same GitHub debate over CJDNS support in Bitcoin Core but credit the low-peer-count observation to different developers.
What all sources agree on
- The GitHub discussion concerns whether Bitcoin Core should continue supporting CJDNS.
- A seeder database held 25 CJDNS addresses.
- Of those, 22 addresses responded/were reached.
- Only 7 addresses were classified as ‘good.’
- The proposal concerns node networking and transport, not block validation or consensus rules.
- Bitcoin Core added CJDNS support in version 23.0.
- No code has been removed and no final decision has been made.
Where the reports disagree
1Who reported seeing only three to four peers
The issue author, Martin Zumsande, reported seeing only three to four peers even though Bitcoin Core ships with 11 fixed CJDNS seeds.
Core developer Marco Falke reported that his instance was unable to establish connections with more than three or four distinct peers at any given time.
What would settle it: The original GitHub issue #36041 comment thread showing which named contributor posted the three-to-four-peer observation.
What to make of it
Treat the seeder statistics (25 addresses, 22 reached, 7 good) as consistently reported, but the identity of the developer who observed only three to four peers is unresolved between the two accounts until the original GitHub thread is checked.
Treat the seeder statistics (25 addresses, 22 reached, 7 good) as consistently reported, but the identity of the developer who observed only three to four peers is unresolved between the two accounts until the original GitHub thread is checked.
Original source: AltcoinGordon
Syndicated coverage. Originally reported by altcoingordon.com.
Read More
