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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <john.dillon892@googlemail.com>) id 1UWeHw-0003YH-Av
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 29 Apr 2013 02:58:00 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of googlemail.com
designates 74.125.83.51 as permitted sender)
client-ip=74.125.83.51;
envelope-from=john.dillon892@googlemail.com;
helo=mail-ee0-f51.google.com;
Received: from mail-ee0-f51.google.com ([74.125.83.51])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1UWeHv-0003F6-HA
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 29 Apr 2013 02:58:00 +0000
Received: by mail-ee0-f51.google.com with SMTP id c1so1451499eek.38
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sun, 28 Apr 2013 19:57:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.15.101.200 with SMTP id bp48mr117244748eeb.38.1367204273185;
Sun, 28 Apr 2013 19:57:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.223.72.141 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 19:57:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgSo6Ua8giSKhYTjGm=2U1nBjprHOBqCL7dSNr9MQX_6tw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPg+sBjSe23eADMxu-1mx0Kg2LGkN+BSNByq0PtZcMxAMh0uTg@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP3FA-5z3gAC1aYbG2EOKM2eDyv7zX3S9+ia2ZJ0LPkKiA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgSo6Ua8giSKhYTjGm=2U1nBjprHOBqCL7dSNr9MQX_6tw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 02:57:53 +0000
Message-ID: <CAPaL=UUhrb+4CANVB6refCOeQwcf_A80Way_C_oJbDKM9kmWXg@mail.gmail.com>
From: John Dillon <john.dillon892@googlemail.com>
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-)
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
(john.dillon892[at]googlemail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in
digit (john.dillon892[at]googlemail.com)
-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: 1UWeHv-0003F6-HA
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Service bits for pruned nodes
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, 29 Apr 2013 02:58:00 -0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
> But I also agree that its important that <everything> be splittable into =
ranges
> because otherwise when having to choose between serving historic data
> and=97 say=97 40 GB storage, a great many are going to choose not to serv=
e
> historic data... and so nodes may be willing to contribute 4-39 GB storag=
e
> to the network there will be no good way for them to do so and we may end
> up with too few copies of the historic data available.
Have we considered just leaving that problem to a different protocol such a=
s
BitTorrent? Offering up a few GB of storage capacity is a nice idea but it
means we would soon have to add structure to the network to allow nodes to =
find
each other to actually get that data. BitTorrent already has that issue tho=
ught
through carefully with it's DHT support.
What are the logistics of either integrating a DHT capable BitTorrent clien=
t,
or just calling out to some library? We could still use the Bitcoin network=
to
bootstrap the BitTorrent DHT.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJRfeF/AAoJEEWCsU4mNhiP228H+gIiBhOf65ydmVXoq7d6toNt
FmWZaHUxAKtdADINqKHKjuCVGb+3RITwZIgQ0t2MO3OlG1FRFzZv841QBmdaW7JI
B6uF2hBxw6oy3GolzIbSUBX+7VyoNvFGT9c548wfLWC71O7A9/Wf3dUssN6VdWXG
zm2vTO8cnMOHNt0Iu4uRw5mvOOU6WV9f6k3BsnQEK8y8E3w1k8xZIrHMqCo99B5U
a0R2TOpIyK++8xz3Ls1johcFcfwkphESn8SIxMeyb/sgotxO23yqQNDqn8rDCD4S
PxVY/yzpftinjR55bvvjRGDVkUY43ixU8t7lFOgI1vwmfRw4jBqk7WWYJK7jC6c=3D
=3D0VmS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
