ok, those proposals sound reasonable.

can you explain the reasoning behind HasCanonicalPushes()?

about accepting txs with unconfirmed inputs: originally I didn't have
this but I only added it for compatibility with bitcoind:
https://github.com/spesmilo/libbitcoin/commit/6ab8340a
I didn't like this at the time, so now I'm going to remove that code.
simplifies everything & much better IMO.

that's the 'unconfirmed' parameter for when you store a tx:
https://github.com/spesmilo/libbitcoin/blob/master/include/bitcoin/transaction_pool.hpp#L152

On 14/02/14 11:50, Grazcoin wrote:
> The latest modification on the reference client that should fight the
> DDoS could be also implemented on libbitcoin:
>
> Add HasCanonicalPushes(), and use it in IsStandardTx
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/87fe71e1fc810ee120a10063fdd26c3245686d54
>
> Add option to avoid spending unconfirmed change
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/1bbca249b202c4802cc2c4d4de4a26e6392b4d92
>
> Grazcoin
>
> On 02/14/2014 09:34 AM, Grazcoin wrote:
>> How about ignoring all non-standard transaction (e.g. with outputs
>> smaller than dust limit 5430 satohis)?
>> We could still keep an option to enable the non-standard transactions
>> using a command line argument.
>>
>> On reference implementation since 0.8.2:
>>
>> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=219504.0
>>
>> Payments (transaction outputs) of 0.543 times the minimum relay fee
>> (0.00005430 BTC) are now considered 'non-standard', because storing them
>> costs the network more than they are worth and spending them will
>> usually cost their owner more in transaction fees than they are worth.
>>
>> Non-standard transactions are not relayed across the network, are not
>> included in blocks by most miners, and will not show up in your wallet
>> until they are included in a block.
>>
>>
>> On 02/14/2014 07:57 AM, Amir Taaki wrote:
>>> Hey, you're right. What rules do you propose that are elegant that we
>>> can use to prioritise transactions and filter spam? I don't believe the
>>> mempool rules in Satoshi bitcoind are well designed.
>>>
>>> On 13/02/14 22:41, Grazcoin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The transaction:
>>>> c5e2814507f49b5370f70c4477b02854a34c16af2c301cf097d1a634c4721ee6
>>>> is an example for a spam transaction (part of the attack on bitcoin
>>>> network).
>>>>

>>>> $ sx fetch-transaction
>>>> c5e2814507f49b5370f70c4477b02854a34c16af2c301cf097d1a634c4721ee6 | wc
>>>>       1       1   51317

>>>>
>>>> $ sx fetch-transaction
>>>> c5e2814507f49b5370f70c4477b02854a34c16af2c301cf097d1a634c4721ee6 | sx
>>>> showtx | head -n 20
>>>> hash: c5e2814507f49b5370f70c4477b02854a34c16af2c301cf097d1a634c4721ee6
>>>> version: 1
>>>> locktime: 0
>>>> Input:
>>>> previous output:
>>>> 9d9dd3402bb4ad7c409f3b5cf1b695a2d7815a58ef12982d0aeaa6a6a6880aee:0
>>>> script: [
>>>> 30450221008eb4a4a7d91468fa1ec083dd72868dd0ccb314df580e0a84e76b51df43c58ae402205d07ddf588ee43bd4780ba9241c7075ec46cc1e83c9d21e4c49e3a01aefa516701
>>>> ] [
>>>> 045cce731a4d6308e5baf7d73ad2fcab298563bbc86404905d84e2b0ec314946a6d0e8076bd9db8e85ca0e7e5bd33f2adc629d48ac26f10e6ee459fc64efb5b8f5
>>>> ]
>>>> sequence: 4294967295
>>>> address: 1SochiWwFFySPjQoi2biVftXn8NRPCSQC
>>>> Output:
>>>> value: 1
>>>> script: dup hash160 [ addd9328c13df98785d28be84ea8b93af1777969 ]
>>>> equalverify checksig
>>>> address: 1GrKLUduDbS5WM8zMJ4qzPCZ7UMpxj9AMo
>>>> Output:
>>>> value: 1
>>>> script: dup hash160 [ 5754bc1d08e76b8c021d7e04c7448ab751df5dad ]
>>>> equalverify checksig
>>>> address: 18xmJAisJ1GBLVpuyFmqaA7LNmj8d6NE73
>>>> Output:
>>>> value: 1
>>>> script: dup hash160 [ ad731d73d79a753ae71d64aa80c7697ee7cd603f ]
>>>> equalverify checksig
>>>> address: 1Gp7oXBtT2V5a4gqGcDVetw2aPw7vFPx1D
>>>>
>>>> It just sends 1 satoshi to a long list of addresses, and it is clear
>>>> that it will never get included in a block.
>>>> Shouldn't we just ignore the tx (not keep it in the memory pool and not
>>>> forward it)?
>>>> blockchain.info does.
>>>>
>>>> If for some reason it does enter a block, we'll get it anyway.
>>>> Grazcoin
>>>>
>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Libbitcoin mailing list
>> Libbitcoin@???
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libbitcoin
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Libbitcoin mailing list
> Libbitcoin@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libbitcoin
>