Wladimir J. van der Laan c08bf2b574
Merge #15437: p2p: Remove BIP61 reject messages
fa25f43ac5692082dba3f90456c501eb08f1b75c p2p: Remove BIP61 reject messages (MarcoFalke)

Pull request description:

  Reject messages (BIP 61) appear in the following settings:

  * Parsing of reject messages (in case `-debug=net` is set, off by default). This has only been used for a single `LogPrint` call for several releases now. Such logging is completely meaningless to us and should thus be removed.

  * The sending of reject messages (in case `-enablebip61` is set, off by default). This can be used to debug a node that is under our control. Instead of hacking this debugging into the p2p protocol, it could be more easily achieved by parsing the debug log. (Use `-printtoconsole` to have it as stream, or read from the `debug.log` file like our python function `assert_debug_log` in the test framework does)

  Having to maintain all of this logic and code to accommodate debugging, which can be achieved by other means a lot easier, is a burden. It makes review on net processing changes a lot harder, since the reject message logic has to be carried around without introducing any errors or DOS vectors.

ACKs for top commit:
  jnewbery:
    utACK fa25f43ac5692082dba3f90456c501eb08f1b75c
  laanwj:
    I'm still not 100% convinced that I like getting rid of BIP61 conceptually, but apparently everyone wants it, code review ACK fa25f43ac5692082dba3f90456c501eb08f1b75c.
  ryanofsky:
    Code review ACK fa25f43ac5692082dba3f90456c501eb08f1b75c

Tree-SHA512: daf55254202925e56be3d6cfb3c1c804e7a82cecb1dd1e5bd7b472bae989fd68ac4f21ec53fc46751353056fd645f7f877bebcb0b40920257991423a3d99e0be
2019-10-09 11:51:58 +02:00
..
2018-07-27 07:15:02 -04:00
2019-02-15 22:36:05 -08:00
2019-10-02 10:39:14 -04:00
2019-10-02 10:39:14 -04:00
2018-07-27 07:15:02 -04:00