1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1TCB9L-0003sg-2e
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:16:15 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.223.175 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.223.175; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ie0-f175.google.com;
Received: from mail-ie0-f175.google.com ([209.85.223.175])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1TCB9F-0003hM-Oo
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:16:15 +0000
Received: by mail-ie0-f175.google.com with SMTP id c11so5311889ieb.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 13 Sep 2012 08:16:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.40.132 with SMTP id x4mr7959igk.48.1347549369551; Thu, 13
Sep 2012 08:16:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.56.66 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 08:16:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <FC0AF926-2CBD-49BA-A3B7-AF9D70A83CE4@godofgod.co.uk>
References: <2104FC7F-0AE0-4C55-9987-B20EFCE19FC3@godofgod.co.uk>
<CAAS2fgSymOJ=cQnNwK9+nvRYszHHH4vtUpoQYWNNYoVaYB5Gpg@mail.gmail.com>
<19ED4257-0BCA-41C5-A533-B0AB9B500181@godofgod.co.uk>
<CAAS2fgRfXBrsFm_zdNFe7Z4FN7uQ5zSg++scng=hNrHZZV93VQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP0HHhSXyN9pWODtTxHMfRB4B0w-eSdvNHH13WwLVgECrw@mail.gmail.com>
<FC0AF926-2CBD-49BA-A3B7-AF9D70A83CE4@godofgod.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 11:16:09 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgSd6t038Yzb-Vy34J61xob+kVqA8pK+w1+ZwJ6XtQRJww@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Matthew Mitchell <matthewmitchell@godofgod.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-)
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
(gmaxwell[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-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: 1TCB9F-0003hM-Oo
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Segmented Block Relaying BIP draft.
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: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:16:15 -0000
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Matthew Mitchell
<matthewmitchell@godofgod.co.uk> wrote:
> @Gregory
>
>> But you only need to request the transactions you don't have. Most of
>> time you should already have almost all of the transactions.
>
> Yes, my proposal allows you to do this. You skip out transactions your al=
ready have. My proposal is simply better than others because it takes full =
advantage of the merkle tree structure with minor additions that are simple=
to implement. How hard is it to get the hashes at a particular level of a =
merkle tree? Not hard at all. How hard is it to place a selection of transa=
ctions from a block into a message Not hard at all. Implementation of the p=
rotocol requirements would be a piece of cake. The harder bit would be to c=
reate an algorithm to determine the best level of segmentation but this is =
not required to comply with the protocol.
Sorry, I'm still not seeing what the value is. How is the tree level
useful to anyone? If you did want to get only parts of the
transaction list, why not just ranges from the lowest level?
|
