Replying to Avatar Leo Wandersleb

New relays pull "{}" from other relays to get started. I did and others do. [nostr.info](https://nostr.info) will soon have metrics on which relay delivers which events on that query without limits.

At some point expecting relays to hold, and transmit, all messages since the beginning of time might become unreasonable. In any case, why would we want that? We, users, can simply retransmit our kind:0 profiles periodically. I'll admit that more-speech is a bit aggressive about this; but that would be easy enough to moderate.

>From: Giszmo47 at 07/29/22 10:52:01 on wss://wlvs.space

>---------------

>New relays pull "{}" from other relays to get started. I did and others do. [nostr.info](https://nostr.info) will soon have metrics on which relay delivers which events on that query without limits.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

The distinction here is replaceable events vs. non-replaceable ones. Please look into nip-16.

I really dislike HIP-16. Again, changing or failing to record history is probably not a good precedent to set. I'm also unclear as to where the 'supported_nips' field is to be found. Perhaps #[6] can clarify.

>From: Giszmo47 at 07/29/22 12:20:57 on wss://relay.nostr.info

>---------------

>The distinction here is replaceable events vs. non-replaceable ones. Please look into nip-16.

The range 10k-30k is occupied by nip-16. So what? Make your client use other kinds. (How many events with negative kind are out there?) There are data hoarders that store even the ephemeral events. Relays should just not send them out on a "REQ". nip-11 defines a supported_nip.

My PR for nip-23 also defines supported_nips.