On Wednesday, May 16, 2012 6:38:28 PM Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Luke-Jr wrote:
> > That assumes you already have a connection to the peer in question.
> > As I understand it, the service bits are propagated as part of the
> > address, so you can see at a glance which no
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Luke-Jr wrote:
> That assumes you already have a connection to the peer in question.
> As I understand it, the service bits are propagated as part of the address,
> so you can see at a glance which nodes you want to connect to for some
> special service. Passing a
On Wednesday, May 16, 2012 6:18:27 PM Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Instead of further overloading service bits in the version message, or
> altering the version message, let us instead make feature discovery an
> easy, flexible, extensible process.
>
> We can add new commands without impacting older nodes
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Amir Taaki wrote:
> Please check out my proposal,
>
> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0033
>
> I want to use the existing Bitcoin protocol to provide this functionality in
> order to maintain compatibility. This proposal does not affect current
> Bitcoin clients,
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> Thanks for getting this started.
>
> With regards to the specific proposal, I don't believe it's the best option
> and still plan to eventually implement the original design outlined more
> than a year ago in this thread:
>
> https://bitcoint
> 1) This is cool and useful (but see 3)
> 2) This is significantly less secure than validating an entire blockchain;
> it's certainly worth working out some use cases here in more detail than just
> a sample conversation. More on this below
> 3) What about discovery? Will a client now have the
A bloom filter seems like an interesting idea. However this proposal is
concerned mainly with the initialisation stage, whereas this bloom filter is
for pushed blocks.
This proposal still updates new transactions and blocks in the same way, and
it's not inconceivable to later use a bloom filter
Thanks for this, Amir.
My initial reactions:
1) This is cool and useful (but see 3)
2) This is significantly less secure than validating an entire blockchain;
it's certainly worth working out some use cases here in more detail than
just a sample conversation. More on this below
3) What about disc
Thanks for getting this started.
With regards to the specific proposal, I don't believe it's the best option
and still plan to eventually implement the original design outlined more
than a year ago in this thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=7972.msg116285#msg116285
Namely that you
Hi,
Please check out my proposal,
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0033
I want to use the existing Bitcoin protocol to provide this functionality in
order to maintain compatibility. This proposal does not affect current Bitcoin
clients, but allows the parallel system to operate alongside and som
10 matches
Mail list logo
