Amending the P2P Layer












5















Is it possible to amend the P2P layer of Tezos? As far as I understand from here, the amendment process is only for the economic protocol.



If we wanted to suggest changes to how the P2P layer works through future research, how would we go about it? Through a hard fork?










share|improve this question





























    5















    Is it possible to amend the P2P layer of Tezos? As far as I understand from here, the amendment process is only for the economic protocol.



    If we wanted to suggest changes to how the P2P layer works through future research, how would we go about it? Through a hard fork?










    share|improve this question



























      5












      5








      5








      Is it possible to amend the P2P layer of Tezos? As far as I understand from here, the amendment process is only for the economic protocol.



      If we wanted to suggest changes to how the P2P layer works through future research, how would we go about it? Through a hard fork?










      share|improve this question
















      Is it possible to amend the P2P layer of Tezos? As far as I understand from here, the amendment process is only for the economic protocol.



      If we wanted to suggest changes to how the P2P layer works through future research, how would we go about it? Through a hard fork?







      protocol network






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited Apr 8 at 10:04









      luchonacho

      620519




      620519










      asked Apr 3 at 3:48









      ralexralex

      936




      936






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          6














          The P2P layer is part of the shell and is not amended via the onchain governance. Improvements to the existing approach are always welcome by contributing to the gitlab.



          People are also free to work on separate implementations of the shell and explore different approaches to optimization while still remaining compatible with the existing shell. And of course nothing stops anyone from deciding they want to be incompatible and attempt to fork.



          There is already an implementation in Rust underway whose motivation is described as:



          The Tezos ecosystem will benefit from an increase in the diversity of its nodes (multiple implementations across a range of different programing languages & operating systems). It allows us to verify that the protocol is unambiguous. It keeps the door open for innovation and secures the honesty of all participants.



          For more details see here.






          share|improve this answer


























          • You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.

            – Pierre Chambart
            Apr 8 at 21:13



















          1














          There is a version negotiation at the initialization of the connection. You can make an incompatible version of the P2P protocol as long as it has a different version name. For the network not to be split, you need at least one node that speaks both versions of the protocol.






          share|improve this answer
























            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "698"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftezos.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f980%2famending-the-p2p-layer%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            6














            The P2P layer is part of the shell and is not amended via the onchain governance. Improvements to the existing approach are always welcome by contributing to the gitlab.



            People are also free to work on separate implementations of the shell and explore different approaches to optimization while still remaining compatible with the existing shell. And of course nothing stops anyone from deciding they want to be incompatible and attempt to fork.



            There is already an implementation in Rust underway whose motivation is described as:



            The Tezos ecosystem will benefit from an increase in the diversity of its nodes (multiple implementations across a range of different programing languages & operating systems). It allows us to verify that the protocol is unambiguous. It keeps the door open for innovation and secures the honesty of all participants.



            For more details see here.






            share|improve this answer


























            • You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.

              – Pierre Chambart
              Apr 8 at 21:13
















            6














            The P2P layer is part of the shell and is not amended via the onchain governance. Improvements to the existing approach are always welcome by contributing to the gitlab.



            People are also free to work on separate implementations of the shell and explore different approaches to optimization while still remaining compatible with the existing shell. And of course nothing stops anyone from deciding they want to be incompatible and attempt to fork.



            There is already an implementation in Rust underway whose motivation is described as:



            The Tezos ecosystem will benefit from an increase in the diversity of its nodes (multiple implementations across a range of different programing languages & operating systems). It allows us to verify that the protocol is unambiguous. It keeps the door open for innovation and secures the honesty of all participants.



            For more details see here.






            share|improve this answer


























            • You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.

              – Pierre Chambart
              Apr 8 at 21:13














            6












            6








            6







            The P2P layer is part of the shell and is not amended via the onchain governance. Improvements to the existing approach are always welcome by contributing to the gitlab.



            People are also free to work on separate implementations of the shell and explore different approaches to optimization while still remaining compatible with the existing shell. And of course nothing stops anyone from deciding they want to be incompatible and attempt to fork.



            There is already an implementation in Rust underway whose motivation is described as:



            The Tezos ecosystem will benefit from an increase in the diversity of its nodes (multiple implementations across a range of different programing languages & operating systems). It allows us to verify that the protocol is unambiguous. It keeps the door open for innovation and secures the honesty of all participants.



            For more details see here.






            share|improve this answer















            The P2P layer is part of the shell and is not amended via the onchain governance. Improvements to the existing approach are always welcome by contributing to the gitlab.



            People are also free to work on separate implementations of the shell and explore different approaches to optimization while still remaining compatible with the existing shell. And of course nothing stops anyone from deciding they want to be incompatible and attempt to fork.



            There is already an implementation in Rust underway whose motivation is described as:



            The Tezos ecosystem will benefit from an increase in the diversity of its nodes (multiple implementations across a range of different programing languages & operating systems). It allows us to verify that the protocol is unambiguous. It keeps the door open for innovation and secures the honesty of all participants.



            For more details see here.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Apr 8 at 10:04









            luchonacho

            620519




            620519










            answered Apr 3 at 6:37









            cousinitcousinit

            1,100314




            1,100314













            • You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.

              – Pierre Chambart
              Apr 8 at 21:13



















            • You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.

              – Pierre Chambart
              Apr 8 at 21:13

















            You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.

            – Pierre Chambart
            Apr 8 at 21:13





            You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.

            – Pierre Chambart
            Apr 8 at 21:13











            1














            There is a version negotiation at the initialization of the connection. You can make an incompatible version of the P2P protocol as long as it has a different version name. For the network not to be split, you need at least one node that speaks both versions of the protocol.






            share|improve this answer




























              1














              There is a version negotiation at the initialization of the connection. You can make an incompatible version of the P2P protocol as long as it has a different version name. For the network not to be split, you need at least one node that speaks both versions of the protocol.






              share|improve this answer


























                1












                1








                1







                There is a version negotiation at the initialization of the connection. You can make an incompatible version of the P2P protocol as long as it has a different version name. For the network not to be split, you need at least one node that speaks both versions of the protocol.






                share|improve this answer













                There is a version negotiation at the initialization of the connection. You can make an incompatible version of the P2P protocol as long as it has a different version name. For the network not to be split, you need at least one node that speaks both versions of the protocol.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered Apr 8 at 21:11









                Pierre ChambartPierre Chambart

                1962




                1962






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Tezos Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftezos.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f980%2famending-the-p2p-layer%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    "Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'ON'. (on update cascade, on delete cascade,)

                    Alcedinidae

                    RAC Tourist Trophy