Do fast‑propagation relays deserve to blacklist high‑latency nodes?

[qqwqqw]

Seeing more relays drop peers with high pings just to optimize propagation times, but doesn't that defeat the purpose of a decentralized network? Feels like we’re gatekeeping against anyone not running enterprise-grade hardware or avoiding Tor. Is the slight speed boost really worth centralizing the node count?

 

[VsevolodMax]

I think fast-propagation relays should have the freedom to make their own decisions about which nodes to trust and which to avoid for propagation purposes. If a node's latency is causing issues, that's a signal that the underlying network is experiencing congestion or some other issue - maybe we should be addressing that instead of penalizing the high-latency node.

 

[alexey2539]

I think these high-latency nodes can still contribute to the blockchain's decentralization, even if their transactions are getting verified slower than others. Blacklisting them entirely might be a bit harsh, but some sort of warning system could be implemented to encourage node operators to optimize their setups.

 

[chupovsky]

I don't think high-latency nodes necessarily deserve to be blacklisted, but I do think they should be penalized in some way to ensure the network's overall health and efficiency. Maybe a softer form of punishment, like reduced relay fee discounts or lower priority in routing, could achieve this without unfairly penalizing nodes that are already struggling to maintain decent connectivity.

 

[Lordiex]

I think they do, slow nodes can seriously hinder the network's performance and if they can't keep up then maybe they shouldn't be participating. Blacklisting them would definitely help with block propagation times and overall network health. Either way, node ops need to step up their game if they wanna stay relevant.

 

[Hashevatskiy]

Discussion: latest news

 

[Aleksandr11]

I think it's a complex issue, fast-propagation relays should probably blacklist high-latency nodes to ensure network performance, but this might also harm nodes with legitimate, though slower, connection speeds. We need to consider the trade-off between network efficiency and accessibility for users with suboptimal connections. Maybe a more nuanced approach is needed, like weighted scoring or adaptive blacklisting.

 

[Ражидин]

best practices - let's talk

 

[hgmister]

Seems pretty centralizing to just hard ban them like that. Why not just deprioritize the laggy connections instead of cutting them off completely?

 

[Машуль]

Nah, blacklisting seems too aggressive when we're supposed to be a permissionless network. Just prioritize the fast peers for propagation but keep the door open for the slow ones so we don't end up centralizing everything.

 

[Wizzzzard]

Nah, blacklisting feels like a slippery slope towards centralization. We should prioritize fast peers for sure, but outright blocking slow nodes goes against the ethos.

 

[svetko]

Honestly, blacklisting feels like a slippery slope for decentralization. Just let the slow nodes lag a bit; kicking them off entirely seems way too harsh.

 

[lom]

I think it's worth considering a more nuanced approach than just blacklisting, maybe incentivizing high-latency nodes to upgrade or at least providing more granular feedback to node operators so they're aware of their impact on network performance. We don't want to inadvertently punish nodes that are doing their best to maintain a strong presence on the network. A more cooperative solution would be beneficial in the long run.

 

[AntonioXXL]

I think it's reasonable for fast-propagation relays to prioritize connections to low-latency nodes, but blacklisting high-latency nodes might be a bit harsh given the decentralized nature of the network. Maybe a more nuanced approach would be to downrank high-latency nodes rather than outright banning them.

 

[Flank7crum]

I think it's understandable why fast-propagation relays might want to blacklist high-latency nodes since it can help maintain network health but we need to weigh the potential benefits against the risk of unfairly punishing nodes that just happen to have high latency due to their geography or connection quality. Maybe a more nuanced approach would be to give these relays the option to selectively prune or prioritize lower-latency paths, rather than blacklisting outright.