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
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <clem.ds@gmail.com>) id 1W0z3L-0007jE-8F
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 08 Jan 2014 19:44:35 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.216.46 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.216.46; envelope-from=clem.ds@gmail.com;
helo=mail-qa0-f46.google.com;
Received: from mail-qa0-f46.google.com ([209.85.216.46])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1W0z3K-0002mb-LO
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 08 Jan 2014 19:44:35 +0000
Received: by mail-qa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id j5so2121287qaq.33
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:44:29 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.49.17.232 with SMTP id r8mr214028134qed.74.1389210269174;
Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:44:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.229.177.195 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 11:44:29 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAP63atZBJqi6oN9EbPxzEo4qk5ZMgEKQ11NSPWmU65FypDdbzw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAP63atZBJqi6oN9EbPxzEo4qk5ZMgEKQ11NSPWmU65FypDdbzw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 20:44:29 +0100
Message-ID: <CAP63atZ=-Wd++nuL_Gf-wnT768w3wHhxsA+KgVY-S_C2+1QRLw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Cl=E9ment_Elbaz?= <clem.ds@gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bea3be49cd03d04ef7ab817
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
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
(clem.ds[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-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
X-Headers-End: 1W0z3K-0002mb-LO
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Getting trusted metrics from the block
chain in an untrusted environment ?
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: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 19:44:35 -0000
--047d7bea3be49cd03d04ef7ab817
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Some more thoughts :
If no such project exist yet, I thought it could work with an alternate,
small and fixed-length 'metric request block chain' of some sort.
It would temporarily stores structures defined as [metric request | current
block number when request was made | hash of the response] instead of
financial transactions.
These structures are verifiable so it could work the same way as a regular
financial blochchain.
It should not be part of the main Bitcoin protocol but could be a plugin
interacting with the data managed by the fullnode bitcoin software.
Also, metrics requests can be expensive to compute and validate, so it
would make sense to pay a fee everytime you ask one.
Does any of this makes any sense to you ?
Thanks,
Cl=E9ment
--047d7bea3be49cd03d04ef7ab817
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Some more thoughts :<br><br>If no such project exist yet, =
I thought it could work with an alternate, small and fixed-length 'metr=
ic request block chain' of some sort. <br><br>It would temporarily stor=
es structures defined as [metric request | current block number when reques=
t was made | hash of the response] instead of financial transactions. <br>
<br>These structures are verifiable so it could work the same way as a regu=
lar financial blochchain.<br><br>It should not be part of the main Bitcoin =
protocol but could be a plugin interacting with the data managed by the ful=
lnode bitcoin software.<br>
<br>Also, metrics requests can be expensive to compute and validate, so it =
would make sense to pay a fee everytime you ask one.<br><br>Does any of thi=
s makes any sense to you ?<br><br>Thanks,<br><br>Cl=E9ment</div>
--047d7bea3be49cd03d04ef7ab817--
|
