1dc03dda05 [doc] remove non-signaling mentions of BIP125 (glozow)
32024d40f0 scripted-diff: remove mention of BIP125 from non-signaling var names (glozow)
Pull request description:
We have pretty thorough documentation of our RBF policy in doc/policy/mempool-replacements.md. It enumerates each rule with several sentences of rationale. Also, each rule pretty much has its own function (3 and 4 share one), with extensive comments. The doc states explicitly that our rules are similar but differ from BIP125, and contains a record of historical changes to RBF policy.
We should not use "BIP125" as synonymous with our RBF policy because:
- Our RBF policy is different from what is specified in BIP125, for example:
- the BIP does not mention our rule about the replacement feerate being higher (our Rule 6)
- the BIP uses minimum relay feerate for Rule 4, while we have used incremental relay feerate since #9380
- the "inherited signaling" question (CVE-2021-31876). Call it discrepancy, ambiguous wording, doc misinterpretation, or implementation details, I would recommend users refer to doc/policy/mempool-replacements.md
- the signaling policy is configurable, see #25353
- Our RBF policy may change further
- We have already marked BIP125 as only "partially implemented" in docs/bips.md since 1fd49eb498
- See comments from people who are not me recently:
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25038#discussion_r909507429
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25575#issuecomment-1179519204
This PR removes all non-signaling mentions of BIP125 (if people feel strongly, we can remove all mentions of BIP125 period). It may be useful to refer to the concept of "tx opts in to RBF if it has at least one nSequence less than (0xffffffff - 1)" as "BIP125 signaling" because:
- It is succint.
- It has already been widely marketed as BIP125 opt-in signaling.
- Our API uses it when referring to signaling (e.g. getmempoolentry["bip125-replaceable"] and wallet error message "not BIP 125 replaceable"). Changing those is more invasive.
- If/when we have other ways to signal in the future, we can disambiguate them this way. See #25038 which proposes another way of signaling, and where I pulled these commits from.
Alternatives:
- Changing our policy to match BIP125. This doesn't make sense as, for example, we would have to remove the requirement that a replacement tx has a higher feerate (Rule 6).
- Changing BIP125 to match what we have. This doesn't make sense as it would be a significant change to a BIP years after it was finalized and already used as a spec to implement RBF in other places.
- Document our policy as a new BIP and give it a number. This might make sense if we don't expect things to change a lot, and can be done as a next step.
ACKs for top commit:
darosior:
ACK 1dc03dda05
ariard:
ACK 1dc03dda
t-bast:
ACK 1dc03dda05
Tree-SHA512: a3adc2039ec5785892d230ec442e50f47f7062717392728152bbbe27ce1c564141f85253143f53cb44e1331cf47476d74f5d2f4b3cd873fc3433d7a0aa783e02
fadd8b2676 addrman: Use system time instead of adjusted network time (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This changes addrman to use system time for address relay instead of the network adjusted time.
This is an improvement, because network time has multiple issues:
* It is non-monotonic, even if the system time is monotonic.
* It may be wrong, even if the system time is correct.
* It may be wrong, if the system time is wrong. For example, when the node has limited number of connections (`4`), or the system time is wrong by too much (more than +-70 minutes), or the system time only got wrong after timedata collected more than half of the entries while the time was correct, ...)
This may slightly degrade addr relay for nodes where timedata successfully adjusted the time. Addr relay can already deal with minor offsets of up to 10 minutes. Offsets larger than this should still allow addr relay and not result in a DoS.
ACKs for top commit:
dergoegge:
Code review ACK fadd8b2676
Tree-SHA512: b6c178fa01161544e5bc76c4cb23e11bcc30391f7b7a64accce864923766647bcfce2e8ae21d36fb1ffc1afa07bc46415aca612405bd8d4cc1f319c92a08498f
Our RBF policy is different from the rules specified in BIP125. For
example, the BIP does not mention Rule 6, and our Rule 4 uses the
(configurable) incremental relay feerate (distinct from the
minimum relay feerate). Those interested in our policy should refer to
doc/policy/mempool-replacements.md instead. These rules may also
continue to diverge with package RBF and other RBF improvements. Keep
references to the BIP125 signaling wrt sequence numbers, since that is
still correct and widely used. It is helpful to refer to this as "BIP125
signaling" since it is unambiguous and succint, especially if we have
multiple ways to signal replaceability in the future.
The rule numbers in doc/policy/mempool-replacements.md correspond
largely to those of BIP 125, so we can still refer to them like "Rule 5."
This is required for removing the UniValue copy constructor.
-BEGIN VERIFY SCRIPT-
sed -i 's/return NullUniValue/return UniValue::VNULL/g' $(git grep -l NullUniValue ':(exclude)src/univalue')
-END VERIFY SCRIPT-
fa23c19750 univalue: Avoid narrowing and verbose int constructors (MacroFake)
fa3a9a1e8d rpc: Select int-UniValue constructor for enum value in upgradewallet RPC (MacroFake)
Pull request description:
As UniValue provides several constructors for integral types, the
compiler is unable to select one if the passed type does not exactly
match. This is unintuitive for developers and forces them to write
verbose and brittle code. (Refer to `-Wnarrowing` compiler warning)
For example, there are many places where an unsigned int is cast to a
signed int. While the cast is safe in practice, it is still needlessly
verbose and confusing as the value can never be negative. In fact it
might even be unsafe if the unsigned value is large enough to map to a
negative signed one.
Fix this issue and other (minor) type issues.
ACKs for top commit:
aureleoules:
ACK fa23c19750.
Tree-SHA512: 7d99b5b90c7d8eed2e3448167255a59e817dd6b8fcfc1b17c69ddefd0db33d1bf4344fbcd8b7f8685b58182c0f572ab9ffa99467afa666ac21843df7ea645033
As UniValue provides several constructors for integral types, the
compiler is unable to select one if the passed type does not exactly
match. This is unintuitive for developers and forces them to write
verbose and brittle code.
For example, there are many places where an unsigned int is cast to a
signed int. While the cast is safe in practice, it is still needlessly
verbose and confusing as the value can never be negative. In fact it
might even be unsafe if the unsigned value is large enough to map to a
negative signed one.
e71c51b27d refactor: rename command -> message type in comments in the src/net* files (Shashwat)
2b09593bdd scripted-diff: Rename message command to message type (Shashwat)
Pull request description:
This PR is a follow-up to #24078.
> a message is not a command, but simply a message of some type
The first commit covers the message_command variable name and comments not addressed in the original PR in `src/net*` files.
The second commit goes beyond the original `src/net*` limit of #24078 and does similar changes in the `src/rpc/net.cpp` file.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK e71c51b27d💥
Tree-SHA512: 24015d132c00f15239e5d3dc7aedae904ae3103a90920bb09e984ff57723402763f697d886322f78e42a0cb46808cb6bc9d4905561dc6ddee9961168f8324b05
0eea83a85e scripted-diff: rename `proxyType` to `Proxy` (Vasil Dimov)
e53a8505db net: respect -onlynet= when making outbound connections (Vasil Dimov)
Pull request description:
Do not make outbound connections to hosts which belong to a network
which is restricted by `-onlynet`.
This applies to hosts that are automatically chosen to connect to and to
anchors.
This does not apply to hosts given to `-connect`, `-addnode`,
`addnode` RPC, dns seeds, `-seednode`.
Fixes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13378
Fixes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22647
Supersedes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22651
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
utACK 0eea83a85e
prayank23:
reACK 0eea83a85e
jonatack:
ACK 0eea83a85e code review, rebased to master, debug built, and did some manual testing with various config options on signet
Tree-SHA512: 37d68b449dd6d2715843fc84d85f48fa2508be40ea105a7f4a28443b318d0b6bd39e3b2ca2a6186f2913836adf08d91038a8b142928e1282130f39ac81aa741b
-BEGIN VERIFY SCRIPT-
s() { sed -i 's/cs_mapLocalHost/g_maplocalhost_mutex/g' $1; }
s src/net.cpp
s src/net.h
s src/rpc/net.cpp
s src/test/net_tests.cpp
-END VERIFY SCRIPT-
fad943821e scripted-diff: Rename touched member variables (MarcoFalke)
fa663a4c0d Use mockable time for peer connection time (MarcoFalke)
fad7ead146 refactor: Use type-safe std::chrono in net (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Benefits:
* Type-safe
* Mockable
* Allows to revert a temporary test workaround
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
ACK fad943821e
shaavan:
ACK fad943821e
Tree-SHA512: af9bdfc695ab727b100c6810a7289d29b02b0ea9fa4fee9cc1f3eeefb52c8c465ea2734bae0c1c63b3b0d6264ba2c493268bc970ef6916570eb166de77829d82
eaf6be0114 [net processing] Do not request transaction relay from feeler connections (John Newbery)
0220b834b1 [test] Add testing for outbound feeler connections (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
Feelers are short-lived connections used to test the viability of peers. The bitcoind node will periodically open feeler connections to addresses in its addrman, wait for a `version` message from the peer, and then close the connection.
Currently, we set `fRelay` to `1` in the `version` message for feeler connections, indicating that we want the peer to relay transactions to us. However, we close the connection immediately on receipt of the `version` message, and so never process any incoming transaction announcements. This PR changes that behaviour to instead set `fRelay` to `0` indicating that we do not wish to receive transaction announcements from the peer.
This PR also extends the `addconnection` RPC to allow creating outbound feeler connections from the node to the test framework, and a test to verify that the node sets `fRelay` to `0` in the `version` message to feeler connections.
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
ACK eaf6be0114
MarcoFalke:
review ACK eaf6be0114🏃
Tree-SHA512: 1c56837dbd0a396fe404a5e39f7459864d15f666664d6b35ad109628b13158e077e417e586bf48946a23bd5cbe63716cb4bf22cdf8781b74dfce6047b87b465a
fadc0c80ae p2p: Make timeout mockable and type safe, speed up test (MarcoFalke)
fa6d5a238d scripted-diff: Rename m_last_send and m_last_recv (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Use type-safe time for better code readability/maintainability and mockable time for better testability. This speeds up the p2p_timeout test.
This is also a bugfix for intermittent test issues like: https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4769904156999680?command=ci#L2836
Fixes #20654
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK fadc0c80ae
naumenkogs:
ACK fadc0c80ae
Tree-SHA512: 28c6544c97f188c8a0fbc80411c74ab74ffd055885322c325aa3d1c404b29c3fd70a737e86083eecae58ef394db1cb56bc122d06cff63742aa89a8e868730c64
dce8c4c381 rpc: getblockfrompeer (Sjors Provoost)
b884ababc2 rpc: move Ensure* helpers to server_util.h (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
This adds an RPC method to fetch a block directly from a peer. This can used to fetch stale blocks with lower proof of work that are normally ignored by the node (`headers-only` in `getchaintips`).
Usage:
```
bitcoin-cli getblockfrompeer HASH peer_n
```
Closes #20155
Limitations:
* you have to specify which peer to fetch the block from
* the node must already have the header
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
ACK dce8c4c381
fjahr:
re-ACK dce8c4c381
Tree-SHA512: 843ba2b7a308f640770d624d0aa3265fdc5c6ea48e8db32269b96a082b7420f7953d1d8d1ef2e6529392c7172dded9d15639fbc9c24e7bfa5cfb79e13a5498c8
5730a43703 test: Add functional test for AddrFetch connections (Martin Zumsande)
c34ad3309f net, rpc: Enable AddrFetch connections for functional testing (Martin Zumsande)
533500d907 p2p: Add timeout for AddrFetch peers (Martin Zumsande)
b6c5d1e450 p2p: AddrFetch - don't disconnect on self-announcements (Martin Zumsande)
Pull request description:
AddrFetch connections (old name: oneshots) are intended to be short-lived connections on which we ask a peer for addresses via `getaddr` and disconnect after receiving them.
This is done by disconnecting after receiving the first `addr`. However, it is no longer working as intended, because nowadays, the first `addr` a typical bitcoin core node sends is its self-announcement.
So we'll disconnect before the peer gets a chance to answer our `getaddr`.
I checked that this affects both `-seednode` peers specified manually, and DNS seeds when AddrFetch is used as a fallback if DNS doesn't work for us.
The current behavior of getting peers via AddrFetch when starting with an empty addrman would be to connect to the peer, receive its self-announcement and add it to addrman, disconnect, reconnect to the same peer again as a full outbound (no other addresses in addrman) and then receive more `addr`. This is silly and not in line with AddrFetch peer being intended to be short-lived peers.
Fix this by only disconnecting after receiving an `addr` message of size > 1.
[Edit] As per review discussion, this PR now also adds a timeout after which we disconnect if we haven't received any suitable `addr`, and a functional test.
ACKs for top commit:
amitiuttarwar:
reACK 5730a43703
naumenkogs:
ACK 5730a43703
jnewbery:
ACK 5730a43703
Tree-SHA512: 8a81234f37e827705138eb254223f7f3b3bf44a06cb02126fc7990b0d231b9bd8f07d38d185cc30d55bf35548a6fdc286b69602498d875b937e7c58332158bf9
