blob: 2a1df80322a396a94b9194a70c1230799b55676d (
plain)
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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <luke@dashjr.org>) id 1TB9CU-0005Zy-D6
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:59:14 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([173.242.112.54])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1TB9CT-0001sb-Dq for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:59:14 +0000
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown [173.170.188.216])
(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A72CF27A2968;
Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:59:07 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:59:03 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.4.10-gentoo-nestfix; KDE/4.8.3; x86_64; ; )
References: <BA7EEDEA-5A56-42F5-A43D-0D4C9CC99DBC@godofgod.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <BA7EEDEA-5A56-42F5-A43D-0D4C9CC99DBC@godofgod.co.uk>
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F
X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F
X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201209101859.05009.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.4 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
X-Headers-End: 1TB9CT-0001sb-Dq
Cc: Matthew Mitchell <matthewmitchell@godofgod.co.uk>
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: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:59:14 -0000
On Monday, September 10, 2012 3:07:52 PM Matthew Mitchell wrote:
> Here is a BIP draft for improving the block relaying and validation so that
> it can be done in parallel and so that redundancy can be removed. This
> becomes more beneficial the larger the block sizes are.
>
> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/User:MatthewLM/ImprovedBlockRelayingProposal
Most of the problem with block propagation lies in implementation, not
protocol... Distributing missing transaction on an as-needed basis is a
possible improvement at the protocol level, but there hasn't (AFAIK) been any
research into whether the little benefit outweighs the cost yet. In any case,
I don't see why 6 new messages are needed instead of simply adding a single
new type to getinv?
|
