<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub1sa86gng3pvs3jgyt5majwcrhn8ck5qxgy9pjqxkh79u638cd7dys28y304</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub1sa86gng3pvs3jgyt5majwcrhn8ck5qxgy9pjqxkh79u638cd7dys28y304</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2013-10-25&#xA;📝 Original message:Would it make sense to use either fixed length strings or maybe even enums?&#xA;&#xA;On Oct 25, 2013, at 05:34 PM, Gavin Andresen &lt;gavinandresen at gmail.com&gt; wrote:&#xA;Mike Hearn has been lobbying for an &#34;error&#34; message in the Bitcoin p2p protocol for years (at least since the &#34;ban peers if they send us garbage&#34; denial-of-service mitigation code was pull-requested). This came up again with my proposed &#34;smartfee&#34; changes, which would drop low-priority or low-fee transactions.&#xA;-------------- next part --------------&#xA;An HTML attachment was scrubbed...&#xA;URL: &lt;http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131026/eeabfe72/attachment.html&gt;</html></oembed>