SN-2286 已核对来源，附原文与上下文。
它不必是那么破坏性的变更。新节点可以在很长一段时间内继续接受旧交易，直到多数节点已升级，再开始拒绝没有 PoW 的交易。或者，它们可以永远接受旧交易，但每个时间段只限一定数量。
It doesn't have to be such a breaking change. New nodes could accept old transactions for a long time until most nodes have already upgraded before starting to refuse transactions without PoW. Or, they could always accept old transactions, but only a limited number per time period.
我想过很多次给交易加 PoW，但通常想来想去，觉得 0.01 手续费本质上与之相似且更好。0.01 基本就是一份工作证明，但不是浪费。不过如果问题出在验证大量交易上，那 PoW 的验证可以更快。
I've thought about PoW on transactions many times, but usually I end up thinking a 0.01 transaction fee is essentially similar and better. 0.01 is basically a proof of work, but not wasted. But if the problem is validating loads of transactions, then PoW could be checked faster.
一个更普遍的伞形部分解法是实现那个想法：检测收到的区块频率出现不太可能的骤降。这样攻击者仍需要掌握网络算力的相当部分，才能从 DoS 攻击中获益。
A more general umbrella partial solution would be to implement the idea where an unlikely dropoff in blocks received is detected. Then an attacker would still need a substantial portion of the network's power to benefit from a DoS attack.
其他参与者原话gavinandresen原帖 ↗Bitcoin 的 p2p 网络容易受到各种拒绝服务攻击。
Bitcoin's p2p network is subject to various kinds of denial of service attacks.
说了。
There, I said it.
+1
+1
此刻任何演示性测试都只能证明我们已知的东西，还会把开发时间从强化系统挪去救火。
Any demonstration tests at this point would only show what we already know, and divert dev time from strengthening the system to operational fire fighting.
