Age Manning

> This is only relevant when there's a large enough delay between receiving the message and stamping it "ok" for further distribution - for networks that don't validate messages like...

> How so? Presumably, without validation you receive a message and rebroadcast it to everyone without delay - ie there's no "gap" where nodes can send you messages and thus...

Lighthouse has started. This issue will be marked complete once it's integrated into Lighthouse: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/1605 In regards to updating. If we update one of the current bootnodes to 5.1, then...

We have finished our implementation, pending some interop testing.

Another point we may want to consider is the possibility that a node wants to sync from genesis or an earlier state (I haven't thought about how likely this is...

We do penalize peers that send attestations that are over this condition (32 slots). We could reduce it with a leniency period where we don't penalize peers in the reduced...

I added this more as an initial template to work from. The values here are the values Lighthouse currently uses, however we are planning on re-examining these values as I...

Yes I agree this one is tricky. We wanted to try and modify the scoring system to not use this parameter. The point of the parameter is to prevent nodes...

From the v1.1 Specs: > In order to compute P₃, the router maintains a counter that increments whenever a first or near-first message delivery occurs in the topic by a...

Also in favour of the change. I'm just thinking about attacks mentioned and also discovery efficency. Just to clarify, anyone can still spin up a bunch of nodes and subscribe...