Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.160.49 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.160.49; envelope-from=tier.nolan@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-pb0-f49.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 12:27:03 +0100
Message-ID: <CAE-z3OX+Uzw_diW97yKWGzVMBFZHq2t+w15jNSdGMGqwyJ65yQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tier Nolan <tier.nolan@gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b6d80267dbeca04e22c127f
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Distributing low POW headers
Precedence: list

--047d7b6d80267dbeca04e22c127f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I was thinking about a change to the rules for distinguishing between forks
and maybe a BIP..

*Summary*

- Low POW headers should be broadcast by the network

If a header has more than 1/64 of the POW of a block, it should be
broadcast.  This provides information on which fork is getting most of the
hashing power.

- Miners should use the header information to decide on longest chain

The fork selection rule for miners should be biased towards staying on the
fork that has the most hashing power.

This means that they might keep hashing on a fork that is 1-2 blocks
shorter.

If most miners follow the rule, then it is the best strategy for other
miners to also follow this rule.

- Advantages

This lowers the probability of natural and malicious reversals.

*Distributing low POW headers*

First block header messages that have more than 1/64 of the standard POW
requirements would be forwarded.

This means the client needs to maintain a short term view of the entire
header tree.

if (header extends header tree) {
  if (header meets full POW) {
    add to header tree;
    forward to peers;
    check if any blocks in storage now extend the header tree
  } else {
    if (header meets POW / 64) {
      forward to peers;
    }
} else {
  if (header meets POW) {
    add to orphan header storage
  }
}

The storage could be limited and headers could be discarded after a while.

This has the extra advantage that it informs clients of forks that are
receiving hashing power.

This could be linked to a protocol version to prevent disconnects due to
invalid header messages.

*Determining the longest chain*

Each link would get extra credit for headers received.

Assume there are 2 forks starting at block A as the fork point.

A(63) <- B(72) <- C(37) <- D(58)

and

A(63) <- B'(6) <- C'(9) <- D'(4) <- E(7) <- F(6)

The numbers in brackets are the number of low POW headers received that
have those blocks as parent.

The new rule is that the POW for a block is equal to

POW * (1 + (headers / 16))

Only headers within <some threshold> of the end of the (shorter) chain
count.  However, in most cases, that doesn't matter since the fork point
will act as the start point.  As long as miners keep headers for 30-40
blocks, they will likely have all headers back to any reasonable fork point.

This means that the top fork is considered longer, since it has much more
headers, even though it has 2 less blocks.

If 75% of the miners follow this rule, then the top fork will eventually
catch up and win, so it is in the interests of the other 25% to follow the
rule too.

Even if there isn't complete agreement on headers received, the fork that
is getting the most hashing will naturally gain most of the headers, so
ties will be broken quickly.

--047d7b6d80267dbeca04e22c127f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div><div>I was thinking about a change to =
the rules for distinguishing between forks and maybe a BIP..<br><br></div><=
div><b>Summary</b><br></div><br></div><div>- Low POW headers should be broa=
dcast by the network<br>
<br></div><div>If a header has more than 1/64 of the POW of a block, it sho=
uld be broadcast.=A0 This provides information on which fork is getting mos=
t of the hashing power.<br><br></div><div>- Miners should use the header in=
formation to decide on longest chain<br>
<br></div>The fork selection rule for miners should be biased towards stayi=
ng on the fork that has the most hashing power.<br><br></div><div>This mean=
s that they might keep hashing on a fork that is 1-2 blocks shorter.<br>
<br>If most miners follow the rule, then it is the best strategy for other =
miners to also follow this rule.<br><br></div><div>- Advantages<br><br>This=
 lowers the probability of natural and malicious reversals.<br></div><div>
<br></div><div><b>Distributing low POW headers</b><br></div><div><br>First =
block header messages that have more than 1/64 of the standard POW requirem=
ents would be forwarded.<br>
<br></div><div>This means the client needs to maintain a short term view of=
 the entire header tree.<br><br></div><div>if (header extends header tree) =
{<br></div><div>=A0 if (header meets full POW) {<br></div><div>=A0=A0=A0 ad=
d to header tree;<br>

</div><div>=A0=A0=A0 forward to peers;<br></div><div>=A0=A0=A0 check if any=
 blocks in storage now extend the header tree<br></div><div>=A0 } else {<br=
></div><div>=A0=A0=A0 if (header meets POW / 64) {<br></div><div>=A0=A0=A0=
=A0=A0 forward to peers;<br>

</div><div>=A0=A0=A0 }<br></div><div>} else {<br></div><div>=A0 if (header =
meets POW) {<br></div><div>=A0=A0=A0 add to orphan header storage<br></div>=
<div>=A0 }<br>}<br><br></div><div>The storage could be limited and headers =
could be discarded after a while.<br>

<br></div><div>This has the extra advantage that it informs clients of fork=
s that are receiving hashing power.<br><br></div><div>This could be linked =
to a protocol version to prevent disconnects due to invalid header messages=
.<br>

</div><div><br></div><div><b>Determining the longest chain</b><br></div><di=
v><br></div><div>Each link would get extra credit for headers received.<br>=
<br></div>Assume there are 2 forks starting at block A as the fork point.<b=
r>

</div><br><div>A(63) &lt;- B(72) &lt;- C(37) &lt;- D(58)<br><br>and <br><br=
>A(63) &lt;- B&#39;(6) &lt;- C&#39;(9) &lt;- D&#39;(4) &lt;- E(7) &lt;- F(6=
)<br><br></div><div>The numbers in brackets are the number of low POW heade=
rs received that have those blocks as parent.<br>

<br></div><div>The new rule is that the POW for a block is equal to<br><br>=
</div><div>POW * (1 + (headers / 16))<br><br></div><div>Only headers within=
 &lt;some threshold&gt; of the end of the (shorter) chain count.=A0 However=
, in most cases, that doesn&#39;t matter since the fork point will act as t=
he start point.=A0 As long as miners keep headers for 30-40 blocks, they wi=
ll likely have all headers back to any reasonable fork point.<br>
</div><br><div>This means that the top fork is considered longer, since it =
has much more headers, even though it has 2 less blocks.<br><br></div><div>=
If
 75% of the miners follow this rule, then the top fork will eventually=20
catch up and win, so it is in the interests of the other 25% to follow=20
the rule too.<br>
<br></div>Even if there isn&#39;t complete agreement on headers=20
received, the fork that is getting the most hashing will naturally gain=20
most of the headers, so ties will be broken quickly.<br></div></div>

--047d7b6d80267dbeca04e22c127f--