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
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
|
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F697A48
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 24 Feb 2017 03:15:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail148100.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail148100.authsmtp.co.uk
[62.13.148.100])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E79CA4
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 24 Feb 2017 03:15:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c232.authsmtp.com (mail-c232.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.232])
by punt24.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id v1O3FYom089106;
Fri, 24 Feb 2017 03:15:34 GMT
Received: from petertodd.org (ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com
[52.5.185.120]) (authenticated bits=0)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id v1O3FWTH036134
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
Fri, 24 Feb 2017 03:15:33 GMT
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 044F840576;
Fri, 24 Feb 2017 03:15:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 43C60204AB; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 22:15:31 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 22:15:31 -0500
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Bram Cohen <bram@bittorrent.com>
Message-ID: <20170224031531.GA32118@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <20170223011506.GC905@savin.petertodd.org>
<CAAcC9ys5sUxVfOjogFiF3gzk51D_L=QQkOYevTH=qbh_RkA3Hw@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+KqGkrUneGe4yORi=JAAWzoO0UftMUuJm3S-__W5sBh-+T1vQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20170223235105.GA28497@savin.petertodd.org>
<CA+KqGkowxEZeAFYa2JJchBDtRkg1p3YZNocivzu3fAtgRLDRBQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20170224010943.GA29218@savin.petertodd.org>
<CA+KqGkrOK76S3ffPJmpqYcBwtSeKESqN16yZsrwzDR6JZZmwFA@mail.gmail.com>
<20170224025811.GA31911@savin.petertodd.org>
<CA+KqGkq7gavAnAk-tcA+gxL2sWpv3ENhEmHrQHaPdyAsKrLjGg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="82I3+IH0IqGh5yIs"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+KqGkq7gavAnAk-tcA+gxL2sWpv3ENhEmHrQHaPdyAsKrLjGg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-Server-Quench: 80fbd698-fa3f-11e6-829f-00151795d556
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aQdMdAYUHlAWAgsB AmEbW1deUVh7WmA7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq
T0pMXVMcUgQXAmpm YmYeUR9zdAEIcXhz bAhqXiYJCEJzfVsr
E00CCGwHMGF9YGIW Bl1YdwJRcQRDe0tA b1YxNiYHcQ5VPz4z
GA41ejw8IwAXAWx/ Tx0RIEhaZGMxVhIx SREEHCkuGktt
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1037:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 52.5.185.120/25
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A Better MMR Definition
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 03:15:37 -0000
--82I3+IH0IqGh5yIs
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 07:02:36PM -0800, Bram Cohen wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
>=20
> >
> > So to be clear, do you agree or disagree with me that you *can* extract=
a
> > compact proof from a MMR that a given output is unspent?
> >
>=20
> After wading through your logic on how updates are done, I agree that that
> can be done, but apples to apples compact proofs can also be done in a ut=
xo
> commitment, and proofs of the validity of updates can be done in a utxo
> commitment, so there isn't any performance advantage to all that extra
> complexity.
Glad we're on the same page with regard to what's possible in TXO commitmen=
ts.
Secondly, am I correct in saying your UTXO commitments scheme requires rand=
om
access? While you describe it as a "merkle set", obviously to be merkelized
it'll have to have an ordering of some kind. What do you propose that order=
ing
to be?
Maybe more specifically, what exact values do you propose to be in the set?
--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
--82I3+IH0IqGh5yIs
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYr6VPAAoJECSBQD2l8JH73+8IAKdiAsKTI+BFkaosM/lvSoNP
XmqlWOVZVvWvR3iE1yQ4YfN0zM0BU+GPaRfwEevr9y+/IzMFAWHi/m9T+kzykpOE
JLgxfB0MXJjBfrSTSgayfF/ZPtILXn4rs/NQlmxp1DxfFce7hucF8x+n/PyjFLjE
776JSYQxOw3GRjcKQaq3J7HYX9oP+9ac3hRjl0SD8ka7XX01x68tqw1ya8fSA0tp
qN5e0/yWr3jKJ8SZyX9eX3Ns04xXTefvCmMt3ES4w5q5zwkoQiGP9Q/6FxyffWgN
SaQ+ey9iuV2FC7ACPtxFvO3pCyiBp9DD2SJ3Hdn09da3FbjmPZMqb02DCCRjKTQ=
=Bm1b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--82I3+IH0IqGh5yIs--
|
