backport: merge bitcoin#27452, #29347, #29356, #29353, #29452, #29483, #30545, #31383 (BIP324 backports: part 5)#6488
Conversation
… in messages.py
…and few cleanups
…2p_ibd_stalling.py
| {"address", RPCArg::Type::STR, RPCArg::Optional::NO, "The IP address and port to attempt connecting to."}, | ||
| {"connection_type", RPCArg::Type::STR, RPCArg::Optional::NO, "Type of connection to open (\"outbound-full-relay\", \"block-relay-only\", \"addr-fetch\" or \"feeler\")."}, | ||
| {"v2transport", RPCArg::Type::BOOL, RPCArg::Default{false}, "Attempt to connect using BIP324 v2 transport protocol"}, | ||
| {"v2transport", RPCArg::Type::BOOL, RPCArg::Optional::NO, "Attempt to connect using BIP324 v2 transport protocol"}, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
29356: nit: probably partial because of missing bool use_v2transport = self.Arg<bool>(2); part, not sure
There was a problem hiding this comment.
self.Arg<bool>(2) is the equivalent of request.params[2].get_bool(), the newer syntax being introduced in bitcoin#28230 and fleshed out in bitcoin#29277, backporting them out of order brings little benefit but would make backports until that point annoying at best, so it was decided to skip that change but not mark it as partial as the behaviour should be identical.
Though the !request.params[2].isNull() half of use_v2transport is a no-op as v2transport is no longer optional and is a nit that can be addressed later on.
PastaPastaPasta
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
utACK c6f23a7;
looks good enough to me :) a few nits you can consider and if you want, can apply in another PR.
Additional Information
When backporting bitcoin#27452 in
feature_anchors.py,P2P_SERVICES(NODE_NETWORK | NODE_HEADERS_COMPRESSED) has been replaced withNODE_NETWORKas the former evaluates to a value greater than256(specifically2049), which causes test failure. The replacement value is acceptable asNODE_NETWORKis the desired service flag expected by Dash Core (source).Test failure:
Breaking Changes
None expected.
Checklist: