A large portion of a nodes connections live as long as possible given the uptime of the connected nodes. Care is taken it protect long working connections to provide as strong a protection against new and short lived attacks as possible-- a working network should stay working. A sustained attack can frustrate newly connecting/restarting hosts when the recipient is publicly reachable and known to the attacker, but I think that's essentially insoluble (if nothing else, a volumetric attack would guarantee it).
If you're going to be making announcements and whatever, you probably should have taken the time to characterize your observations completely! The failure to do so makes it kinda just look like more lamesauce attempts at market manipulation (not to lob an accusation, it's just what it looks like -- there is a long history of that kind of activity).
> it's too early, at least for me, to know whether peers would drop a node under attack over timeouts,
Do your homework! You're not the first person who ever thought of attacking a bitcoin node. While I'm sure there are areas for improvement, you're not likely to be able to make useful suggestions from a position of almost total ignorance.
If you're going to be making announcements and whatever, you probably should have taken the time to characterize your observations completely! The failure to do so makes it kinda just look like more lamesauce attempts at market manipulation (not to lob an accusation, it's just what it looks like -- there is a long history of that kind of activity).
> it's too early, at least for me, to know whether peers would drop a node under attack over timeouts,
Do your homework! You're not the first person who ever thought of attacking a bitcoin node. While I'm sure there are areas for improvement, you're not likely to be able to make useful suggestions from a position of almost total ignorance.