Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

p2p: Do not relay banned IP addresses #15617

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 20, 2019

Conversation

Projects
None yet
10 participants
@sipa
Copy link
Member

sipa commented Mar 18, 2019

No description provided.

@fanquake fanquake added the P2P label Mar 18, 2019

@gmaxwell

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

gmaxwell commented Mar 18, 2019

Concept ACK. utACK, will test.

@naumenkogs

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

naumenkogs commented Mar 18, 2019

utACK

@jonasschnelli

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

jonasschnelli commented Mar 18, 2019

utACK 054d01d

1 similar comment
@practicalswift

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

practicalswift commented Mar 18, 2019

utACK 054d01d

@MarcoFalke MarcoFalke changed the title Do not relay banned IP addresses p2p: Do not relay banned IP addresses Mar 18, 2019

@promag

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

promag commented Mar 18, 2019

How can this be tested?

@gmaxwell

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

gmaxwell commented Mar 18, 2019

ACK (now tested it, appears to work)

@gmaxwell

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

gmaxwell commented Mar 19, 2019

@promag Instrument your node to log the addr message it sends, ban stuff, check that it's not relaying the banned stuff... which is what I did :) (or otherwise, run the patch, and observe that nothing catches fire)

@promag

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

promag commented Mar 19, 2019

@gmaxwell I mean it could have a functional test or something.

@gmaxwell

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

gmaxwell commented Mar 19, 2019

I sure hope that when people say they've tested a PR it doesn't mean they just ran its unit test...

@promag

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

promag commented Mar 19, 2019

I hope too, but a test would be a nice addition no?

@practicalswift

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

practicalswift commented Mar 19, 2019

Nit: Do we care about the object slicing going on here (slicing from CAddress to CNetAddr)?

(Note: Slicing was present in this code also before this patch.)

@laanwj laanwj added this to the 0.18.0 milestone Mar 19, 2019

@pstratem

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

pstratem commented Mar 19, 2019

utACK 054d01d

@jonasschnelli

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

jonasschnelli commented Mar 20, 2019

I sure hope that when people say they've tested a PR it doesn't mean they just ran its unit test...

Heh. Indeed.
Though, the functional tests are usually a good starting point in how to understand how manual testing can be done...

@laanwj

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

laanwj commented Mar 20, 2019

I sure hope that when people say they've tested a PR it doesn't mean they just ran its unit test...

I don't hope so either. Would make sense to extend the definition of ACKs in CONTRIBUTING.md to describe that a tested ACK involves change-specific manual testing, and in case it's not obvious how that's done, it should be described in the post.

(not trying to say that running the unit+functional tests locally isn't useful! travis cannot possible cover all possible combinations of hardware and software)

utACK 054d01d

@laanwj laanwj merged commit 054d01d into bitcoin:master Mar 20, 2019

2 checks passed

continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

laanwj added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 20, 2019

Merge #15617: p2p: Do not relay banned IP addresses
054d01d Do not relay banned IP addresses (Pieter Wuille)

Pull request description:

Tree-SHA512: 538c43781c789949e1ae566533e76835d478e40e8ba6427b22234ee611cb4a311b2940a214e37c1e9c9afe28a6814a00d490a39e3580bb5ebd85b03e95040246

@laanwj laanwj removed the Needs backport label Mar 20, 2019

laanwj added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 20, 2019

Do not relay banned IP addresses
Github-Pull: #15617
Rebased-From: 054d01d
Tree-SHA512: 2c47cf823cc51aee5a224513a0ca2fd1132f4c567d255ead661e88f009dc5d1db73da79b5e65a63b11b222e17292fdff9035a93cb2e53215d9bbb21a5bce7a41

jonatack added a commit to jonatack/bitcoin that referenced this pull request Mar 20, 2019

jonatack added a commit to jonatack/bitcoin that referenced this pull request Mar 20, 2019

@promag

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

promag commented Mar 20, 2019

My comment was about having this new behavior checked, not about how reviews should be done.

laanwj added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 20, 2019

Merge #15626: Docs: Update ACK description in CONTRIBUTING.md
0d9d2b3 Doc: update ACK description in CONTRIBUTING.md (Jon Atack)

Pull request description:

  as per #15617 (comment).

  Edit:

  as per #15617 (comment) and #15626 (comment).

Tree-SHA512: 12df420d20338270bca310873c73d2f38b631c05cf8b3e5b2c1380f95936cb122687ba66b71de53348222efd5fed6d21e67f535a6ada689bf294dceec184a631

marcinja added a commit to marcinja/bitcoin that referenced this pull request Mar 20, 2019

marcinja added a commit to marcinja/bitcoin that referenced this pull request Mar 20, 2019

@luke-jr

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

luke-jr commented Apr 17, 2019

utACK

HashUnlimited pushed a commit to HashUnlimited/chaincoin that referenced this pull request Apr 19, 2019

Do not relay banned IP addresses
Github-Pull: bitcoin#15617
Rebased-From: 054d01d
Tree-SHA512: 2c47cf823cc51aee5a224513a0ca2fd1132f4c567d255ead661e88f009dc5d1db73da79b5e65a63b11b222e17292fdff9035a93cb2e53215d9bbb21a5bce7a41
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.