On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Mike Koss <m...@coinlab.com> wrote: > Are we just talking about pruning the spent transactions from an old block?
No. We're talking about commitments to the state of _unspent_ transactions which would allow ~memoryless nodes to engage in full validation without having to trust anything with the help of some untrusted non-memoryless peers. Also, talking about being able to securely initialize new pruned nodes (not memoryless but reduced memory) without exposing them to the old history of the chain. In both cases this is possible without substantially degrading the full node security model (rule violations prior to where they begin are only undetectable with a conspiracy of the entire network). But it requires a new data structure for managing these trees of unspent transactions in a secure, scalable, and DOS resistant manner. Fortunately there are lots of possibilities here. > Does it really make sense to adopt a more complex data-structure than the > merkle tree for inclusing in the bticoin protocol? Yes. Though this is obviously not an ultra short term thing. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
