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
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
|
Return-Path: <patrick.strateman@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F123DBEF
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 8 Dec 2015 20:49:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pf0-f181.google.com (mail-pf0-f181.google.com
[209.85.192.181])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7ECC48F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 8 Dec 2015 20:49:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by pfbg73 with SMTP id g73so18024787pfb.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 08 Dec 2015 12:49:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:disposition-notification-to
:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type;
bh=K437B/QQy7qNLvZEn1rmQVAUM3hF7NtMaJscvQxIqtk=;
b=qC5UcZz85KcEOxVlaEwbshOvddxFpy9HnCGMTbA5ENjwDTNHz60tABU0vpmLWXxqM6
Outb6FJzX6C4LGz0O8CkSXw3OXIYTKYcz62yb6TuJpR/575nsCKNwDemJvEX5K8k/mY8
1HhN9EHYniSB+DJVm+TXf/1+gL8xOgHBTiMUU3vw45AC/+B9TFEj1YOa2LDBh57MX50E
K+U+lxYTvhPtC9ArJLZHcmutHHJhh6clzer+GltJcy8ro+yV6ZuSRbMrhq5v+zLk/O92
xBRmU3XbcPIPMq1tbS0HYUOxtVkd3d+bwq5057eW/rcKhagjvUXMctDPg218JDC3E8ab
XYTg==
X-Received: by 10.98.67.76 with SMTP id q73mr7821637pfa.73.1449607777230;
Tue, 08 Dec 2015 12:49:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.45.134.131] (strateman.ninja. [66.175.221.254])
by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id
m20sm6595189pfi.80.2015.12.08.12.49.36
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
Tue, 08 Dec 2015 12:49:36 -0800 (PST)
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <CABCnA7Wqz76m8qo5BYT41Z=hBH+fUfOc4xsFAGg=Niv7Jgkqsg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Patrick Strateman <patrick.strateman@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56674280.3010003@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 12:50:08 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
Icedove/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABCnA7Wqz76m8qo5BYT41Z=hBH+fUfOc4xsFAGg=Niv7Jgkqsg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------070207020308020207040303"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,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
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 08 Dec 2015 20:56:44 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Scaling by Partitioning
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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: Tue, 08 Dec 2015 20:49:38 -0000
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070207020308020207040303
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Payment recipients would need to operate a daemon for each chain, thus
guaranteeing no scaling advantage.
(There are other issues, but I believe that to be enough of a show
stopper not to continue).
On 12/08/2015 08:27 AM, Akiva Lichtner via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am seeking some expert feedback on an idea for scaling Bitcoin. As a
> brief introduction: I work in the payment industry and I have twenty
> years' experience in development. I have some experience with process
> groups and ordering protocols too. I think I understand Satoshi's
> paper but I admit I have not read the source code.
>
> The idea is to run more than one simultaneous chain, each chain
> defeating double spending on only part of the coin. The coin would be
> partitioned by radix (or modulus, not sure what to call it.) For
> example in order to multiply throughput by a factor of ten you could
> run ten parallel chains, one would work on coin that ends in "0", one
> on coin that ends in "1", and so on up to "9".
>
> The number of chains could increase automatically over time based on
> the moving average of transaction volume.
>
> Blocks would have to contain the number of the partition they belong
> to, and miners would have to round-robin through partitions so that an
> attacker would not have an unfair advantage working on just one partition.
>
> I don't think there is much impact to miners, but clients would have
> to send more than one message in order to spend money. Client messages
> will need to enumerate coin using some sort of compression, to save
> space. This seems okay to me since often in computing client software
> does have to break things up in equal parts (e.g. memory pages, file
> system blocks,) and the client software could hide the details.
>
> Best wishes for continued success to the project.
>
> Regards,
> Akiva
>
> P.S. I found a funny anagram for SATOSHI NAKAMOTO: "NSA IS OOOK AT MATH"
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--------------070207020308020207040303
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Payment recipients would need to operate a daemon for each chain,
thus guaranteeing no scaling advantage.<br>
<br>
(There are other issues, but I believe that to be enough of a show
stopper not to continue).<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/08/2015 08:27 AM, Akiva Lichtner
via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CABCnA7Wqz76m8qo5BYT41Z=hBH+fUfOc4xsFAGg=Niv7Jgkqsg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Hello,<br>
<br>
</div>
I am seeking some expert feedback on an idea for
scaling Bitcoin. As a brief introduction: I work
in the payment industry and I have twenty years'
experience in development. I have some experience
with process groups and ordering protocols too. I
think I understand Satoshi's paper but I admit I
have not read the source code.<br>
<br>
</div>
The idea is to run more than one simultaneous chain,
each chain defeating double spending on only part of
the coin. The coin would be partitioned by radix (or
modulus, not sure what to call it.) For example in
order to multiply throughput by a factor of ten you
could run ten parallel chains, one would work on
coin that ends in "0", one on coin that ends in "1",
and so on up to "9".<br>
<br>
</div>
The number of chains could increase automatically over
time based on the moving average of transaction
volume.<br>
<br>
</div>
Blocks would have to contain the number of the partition
they belong to, and miners would have to round-robin
through partitions so that an attacker would not have an
unfair advantage working on just one partition.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I don't think there is much impact to miners, but
clients would have to send more than one message in
order to spend money. Client messages will need to
enumerate coin using some sort of compression, to save
space. This seems okay to me since often in computing
client software does have to break things up in equal
parts (e.g. memory pages, file system blocks,) and the
client software could hide the details.<br>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best wishes for continued success to the project.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Regards,<br>
</div>
Akiva<br>
<br>
</div>
P.S. I found a funny anagram for SATOSHI NAKAMOTO: "NSA IS OOOK
AT MATH"<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------070207020308020207040303--
|
