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
|
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 592C1AB9
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:31:46 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail148154.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail148154.authsmtp.co.uk
[62.13.148.154])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 770EE17F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:31:45 +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 v1NIVhux066909;
Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:31:43 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 v1NIVfte094259
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:31:42 GMT
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2B3D240576;
Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:31:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 4674E20245; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 13:31:40 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 13:31:40 -0500
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: "G. Andrew Stone" <g.andrew.stone@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20170223183140.GA6393@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <20170223011506.GC905@savin.petertodd.org>
<CAAcC9ys5sUxVfOjogFiF3gzk51D_L=QQkOYevTH=qbh_RkA3Hw@mail.gmail.com>
<20170223181929.GA6268@savin.petertodd.org>
<CAHUwRvs=f4=4cQPQoNa2ESJAydztZ3VRQg+SOY66UgDDB5i03w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="EVF5PPMfhYS0aIcm"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHUwRvs=f4=4cQPQoNa2ESJAydztZ3VRQg+SOY66UgDDB5i03w@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-Server-Quench: 52c1667a-f9f6-11e6-829f-00151795d556
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aAdMdAEUHlAWAgsB AmEbWlxeU1x7XWE7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq
T0pMXVMcUgQWeHpX QkseWx1wcgwIfH1y YwhnXCNaWkJ9JFsr
SxhSCGwHMGF9YGIW 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: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:31:46 -0000
--EVF5PPMfhYS0aIcm
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 01:28:18PM -0500, G. Andrew Stone wrote:
> Can an insertion ordered MMR allow an efficient nonexistence proof?
Why do you want a non-existance proof?
It supports an efficient *spentness* proof, which is sufficient for what we
need in Bitcoin, and much more scalable.
--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
--EVF5PPMfhYS0aIcm
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYryqIAAoJECSBQD2l8JH7x1sH/Ag4U8I6Dnr40qBeytx8N0z2
pnEF97yuH6Pi0W+8KGBVuywmhFXwvXJg0S/z7U8ZvX3b74QhXeOMYMfDWbViPvDW
pwlxak9ng2TR93+FQtM5Ueso+LSRiWA/7Fz4PJYs01r4n3gy6RTeLnGQen5bIZT0
TLLGEsbD1HMPP5dyalZXnpzSqcj3YdcMmieGTd5XjJoggnUTEY2uGMEZR61LnZ2X
NpvB5PzDxLcrb588PBizWIk1+4sabBk1SEr4ictzV+B/2LLSYw74lSRYJXW+FOop
mfJi4VgHg7ocjSKkQNqG73UAHm8m+V3c9FYwJ2rPrg6a4LkVLq2wLdWXMO55tNQ=
=TFW6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--EVF5PPMfhYS0aIcm--
|
