> Presumably these components will just get implemented a few times in > some carefully constructed library code, so I don't see an > implementation complexity argument here— except the fact that it isn't > what Matt has implemented so far.
Well, yes, that is basically the implementation complexity argument :) Engineering time isn't free. I don't feel I understand the effort required to do some kind of partial tree encoding. Having a kind of custom compression whereby branches are represented as varint indexes into a dictionary, I can feel how much work that involves and maybe I can make time over the next few weeks to implement it. Has anyone got example code for representing partial Merkle trees? > Also, it's not mentioned in the page— but the hash function used is > not cryptographically strong, so what prevents a complexity (well, > bandwidth in this case) attack? someone could start using txids and > txouts that collide with the maximum number of other existing txouts > in order to waste bandwidth for people. Is this avenue of attack not > a concern? If you just want to waste bandwidth of nodes you can connect to nodes and repeatedly download blocks, or fill the network with fake nodes that spam random generated transactions to whoever connects. I don't see how to avoid that so it seems odd to worry about a much more complicated attack. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_sfd2d_oct _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development