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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <akaramaoun@gmail.com>) id 1Z4vpd-0005RY-21
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 16 Jun 2015 18:43:33 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.213.182 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.213.182; envelope-from=akaramaoun@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ig0-f182.google.com;
Received: from mail-ig0-f182.google.com ([209.85.213.182])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Z4vpb-0006aJ-3v
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 16 Jun 2015 18:43:33 +0000
Received: by igbos3 with SMTP id os3so50907582igb.0
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 16 Jun 2015 11:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.43.196 with SMTP id y4mr5340882igl.14.1434480205785; Tue,
16 Jun 2015 11:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: akaramaoun@gmail.com
Received: by 10.64.20.229 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Jun 2015 11:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20150616181724.GA4055@muck>
References: <CAL8tG==LG=xC_DzOaghbGGKab4=UVpGLQV7781pU4wg+WnFdMg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBjqQ66f1Rmhi9HOBYP5BDjBHvTNPpUN-y3o-KX8dXBMhg@mail.gmail.com>
<557D2571.601@gmail.com>
<CAL8tG=kEv9AfQM+1Rv+tqBujFEjCp+BsjQ-1s7eJC-usogFFqw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBjrSed4r+8-d2RGBVhbzaXxX+o=qqw2u-2jpF2RUqmEmA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJHLa0OJg2hC4Ab4Yxy3ekH4WXD9hqHore8+sbF9r1r2SwT_zg@mail.gmail.com>
<20150616181724.GA4055@muck>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 18:43:25 +0000
X-Google-Sender-Auth: XdAeBn9N299waQym-OrFvYQ2778
Message-ID: <CAL8tG==iJwqPBVTDap=8TC9eCUz4ExfxtGz6p75FXbQJXaByMQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andrew <onelineproof@gmail.com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011604121a71fd0518a6f3a5
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
(akaramaoun[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: 1Z4vpb-0006aJ-3v
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Scaling Bitcoin with Subchains
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: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 18:43:33 -0000
--089e011604121a71fd0518a6f3a5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
> Merge-mined sidechains are not a scaling solution any more than SPV is a
> scaling solution because they don't solve the scaling problem for
> miners.
>
> Some kind of treechain like sidechain / subchains where what part of the
> tree miners can mine is constrained to preserve fairness could be both a
> scaling solution, and decentralized, but no-one has come up with a solid
> design yet that's ready for production. (my treechains don't qualify for
> transactions yet; maybe for other proof-of-publication uses)
>
>
Well doesn't my proposal solve the miner decentralization problem. Only the
direct parent and children chains are merge mined. To be more clear, let
the top chain to have level 1. Each chain that is a child of a chain of
level n has level n+1. For any chain C, a block is accepted if the hash of
its header has an appropriate number of trailing zeros (as usual). It can
also be accepted with special transactions as I will explain. Let C be a
chain of level n. Let C0,C1,....,C9 be its children (each of level n+1).
For any i in {0,1,...,9}, any solution to the mining problem of C can be
inserted as a special transaction inside Ci and this enables the block to
be accepted in Ci (so C and C0,C1,...,C9 are merge mined. But, for any i in
{0,1,...,9} and any j in {0,1,...,9}, any solution to the mining problem of
C cannot be inserted as a special transaction inside of child Cij of Ci. So
that means all of the chains are not merge mined, only localised parts,
right?
By the way, we can eventually get rid of the block size 1 MB limit by
requiring more than just the header to be hashed, but that can be done in
the future as soft fork with sidechains, and is a side topic.
--
PGP: B6AC 822C 451D 6304 6A28 49E9 7DB7 011C D53B 5647
--089e011604121a71fd0518a6f3a5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Peter Todd <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a hr=
ef=3D"mailto:pete@petertodd.org" target=3D"_blank">pete@petertodd.org</a>&g=
t;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0=
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Merge-mined sidechains a=
re not a scaling solution any more than SPV is a<br>
scaling solution because they don't solve the scaling problem for<br>
miners.<br>
<br>
Some kind of treechain like sidechain / subchains where what part of the<br=
>
tree miners can mine is constrained to preserve fairness could be both a<br=
>
scaling solution, and decentralized, but no-one has come up with a solid<br=
>
design yet that's ready for production. (my treechains don't qualif=
y for<br>
transactions yet; maybe for other proof-of-publication uses)<span class=3D"=
HOEnZb"></span><br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Well doesn't my proposal solve the=
miner decentralization problem. Only the direct parent and children chains=
are merge mined. To be more clear, let the top chain to have level 1. Each=
chain that is a child of a chain of level n has level n+1. For any chain C=
, a block is accepted if the hash of its header has an appropriate number o=
f trailing zeros (as usual). It can also be accepted with special transacti=
ons as I will explain. Let C be a chain of level n. Let C0,C1,....,C9 be it=
s children (each of level n+1). For any i in {0,1,...,9}, any solution to t=
he mining problem of C can be inserted as a special transaction inside Ci a=
nd this enables the block to be accepted in Ci (so C and C0,C1,...,C9 are m=
erge mined. But, for any i in {0,1,...,9} and any j in {0,1,...,9}, any sol=
ution to the mining problem of C cannot be inserted as a special transactio=
n inside of child Cij of Ci. So that means all of the chains are not merge =
mined, only localised parts, right?<br></div></div><br></div><div class=3D"=
gmail_extra">By the way, we can eventually get rid of the block size 1 MB l=
imit by requiring more than just the header to be hashed, but that can be d=
one in the future as soft fork with sidechains, and is a side topic.<br></d=
iv><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br clear=3D"all"><br>-- <br><div class=3D"gm=
ail_signature">PGP: B6AC 822C 451D 6304 6A28 =C2=A049E9 7DB7 011C D53B 5647=
</div>
</div></div>
--089e011604121a71fd0518a6f3a5--
|
