Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <timon.elviejo@gmail.com>) id 1RcMXz-0005AK-E9
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sun, 18 Dec 2011 19:37:23 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 74.125.82.53 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=74.125.82.53; envelope-from=timon.elviejo@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ww0-f53.google.com; 
Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com ([74.125.82.53])
	by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1RcMXy-00066a-Kj
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sun, 18 Dec 2011 19:37:23 +0000
Received: by wgbds1 with SMTP id ds1so8603830wgb.10
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Sun, 18 Dec 2011 11:37:16 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.131.90 with SMTP id l68mr3297660wei.36.1324237036469; Sun,
	18 Dec 2011 11:37:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.223.81.79 with HTTP; Sun, 18 Dec 2011 11:37:16 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1324228179.7053.140661013136581@webmail.messagingengine.com>
References: <CABr1YTebhitO4g-SarZ7H=aoG9a8zW1wd0rfR32o8i0vODbLJw@mail.gmail.com>
	<82659F61-0449-47BB-88DC-497E0D02F8A1@ceptacle.com>
	<CALxbBHUXEJLRDZ=RS1vuvkm7rDjFUPir0sU__f6TJXiTTQxWzA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABsx9T0puk3CWH1cfNHMSVEoCPaLJJWNJ+H5ObCERZrzMbrTyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABsx9T06-GA5+KNdr_XzP_M4Av8nEsnMXL29tk078wooZg=RZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1324158558.26106.140661012932641@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<4EED416E.3010902@parhelic.com>
	<1324228179.7053.140661013136581@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 20:37:16 +0100
Message-ID: <CAGQP0AGAgPWpfjDouRcOR3Gu1LWSEJgWxB-JK5Qq0wiP25_CdQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Tim=F3n?= <timon.elviejo@gmail.com>
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
	sender-domain
	0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
	(timon.elviejo[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	1.2 MISSING_HEADERS        Missing To: header
	-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
	author's domain
	0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
	not necessarily valid
	-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
	-0.3 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1RcMXy-00066a-Kj
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Protocol extensions
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 19:37:23 -0000

2011/12/17, theymos <theymos@mm.st>:
> My preferred solution for handling scalability in the future is to
> have lightweight clients download only headers and Merkle trees (which
> are both small and easy to distribute), and then require senders to
> contact recipients directly in order to transmit their transactions.
> Then lightweight clients never need full blocks to build their
> balances, and full nodes don't have to handle expensive queries from
> lightweight clients.

This idea is really interesting. Is there any drawback I don't see?