Bitcoin Improvement Proposals - Case study - >Fallback Nodes

[izhaqblues]

Hi guys,

I wonder if there is a study to decrease the latency of Bitcoin core p2p network nodes?

if we increase the number of "Fallback Nodes".
compare the amount of "FB-nodes" with the miners / Fullnodes and / or network users.

font: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Fallback_Nodes

If we use the site (below) as a comparison.

https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/

we have several points of overload.

Apart from the fact that nodes in the p2p network may not fulfill their task of keeping the network distributed according to the protocol's RFC5694:

"...In principle, all the elements in the system should meet the previous
   criteria for the system to be considered P2P.  However, in practice,
   a system can have a few exceptions (i.e., a few nodes that do not
   meet the criteria) and still be considered P2P."

font: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5694

NODEs of the "network" bitcoin cash and gold tb use the structure of the bitcoin core, so the p2p network can help forks coins to be better, more engaged with their "Trackers" smarter than bitcoin core.

my suggestion is that a case study be done, with the Bitcoin future version for example, to know if decreased latency the network has real benefits.

because I already did some studies in p2p networks, where a node was only 1 file without using several seeders,
the transaction speed was low mainly due to the down / upload latencies of the host / node that is holding the file and what is downloading.

however if I add more SEEDERS, even if they do not have the file I am downloading the number of requests to the host that is sowing will increase and I will download with better speed.

getting to the point of using 100% of the band that I have to download the same file.

carefully

@Everton06 on telegram.

[achow101]

I wonder if there is a study to decrease the latency of Bitcoin core p2p network nodes?

Yes, this is an area that has been extensively studied and researched. Reducing network latency has been something that Matt Corallo has been working on a lot and has resulted in FIBRE and BIP 152 Compact blocks.

if we increase the number of "Fallback Nodes".
compare the amount of "FB-nodes" with the miners / Fullnodes and / or network users.

Increasing the number of these fallback nodes would not help at all whatsoever. They are rarely used and are not even used for normal connections. Rather they are only briefly connected to to get the IP addresses of other nodes to connect to. Increasing their number would not help at all.

[izhaqblues]

I wonder if there is a study to decrease the latency of Bitcoin core p2p network nodes?

Yes, this is an area that has been extensively studied and researched. Reducing network latency has been something that Matt Corallo has been working on a lot and has resulted in FIBRE and BIP 152 Compact blocks.

if we increase the number of "Fallback Nodes".
compare the amount of "FB-nodes" with the miners / Fullnodes and / or network users.

Increasing the number of these fallback nodes would not help at all whatsoever. They are rarely used and are not even used for normal connections. Rather they are only briefly connected to to get the IP addresses of other nodes to connect to. Increasing their number would not help at all.

Thank you very much for your reply.

So much of what you said, I did not know.

I will read the BIP152 specification, I see that if what I had imagined has already been implemented, I will study name resolution solutions in ipv6 and ipsec


carefully