> Yes, the format is something that must be hashed out (no pun > intended). Need input from potential users about what information > they might need.
Matts point that a branch-per-transaction may duplicate data is well made, that said, I suspect a format that tries to fix this would be much more complicated. How about see this project as a three part change? First step - add the mempool command and make nodes sync up their mempools on startup. Second step - if protocol version >= X, the "block" message consists of a header + num transactions + vector<hash> instead of the full transactions themselves. On receiving such a block, we go look to see which transactions we're missing from the mempool and request them with getdata. Each time we receive a tx message we check to see if it was one we were missing from a block. Once all transactions in the block message are in memory, we go ahead and assemble the block, then verify as per normal. This should speed up block propagation. Miners have an incentive to upgrade because it should reduce wasted work. Third step - new message, getmerkletx takes a vector<hash> and returns a merkletx message: "merkle branch missing the root + transaction data itself" for each requested transaction. The filtering commands are added, so the block message now only lists transaction hashes that match the filter which can then be requested with getmerkletx. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
