Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.215.43 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.215.43; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-la0-f43.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CA+iPb=EaX=bvOjNtZ+LnYTMRLQQ9nFcrefAkBdv8eActoX_b8A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+iPb=EaX=bvOjNtZ+LnYTMRLQQ9nFcrefAkBdv8eActoX_b8A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 16:34:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgSz0xS_OJKx-Xvw9GWkeJXEOL5aFQ+2mC=y5RwKNRykRQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Kaz Wesley <keziahw@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Squashing redundant tx data in blocks on
 the wire
Precedence: list

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Kaz Wesley <keziahw@gmail.com> wrote:
> A node should be able to forget invs it has seen without invalidating wha=
t
> peers
> know about its known txes. To allow for this, a node assembles a bloom
> filter of

Another option would be to just guarantee to keep at least the last N
sent in each direction to bound memory usage. N could be negotiated.

Going more complex than that may not have wins enough to justify it...
would be good to measure it.


(If you're not aware of it, check out=E2=80=94
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/User:Gmaxwell/block_network_coding for a
more complex idea)