Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <mark@monetize.io>) id 1WcHEi-0000nO-1C
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 21 Apr 2014 16:38:28 +0000
Received: from mail-pd0-f176.google.com ([209.85.192.176])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1WcHEg-0001M1-WB
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 21 Apr 2014 16:38:28 +0000
Received: by mail-pd0-f176.google.com with SMTP id r10so3845371pdi.35
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Mon, 21 Apr 2014 09:38:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
	h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent
	:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=cptUNMrrJPJ1wRb2y0IziS7ms6lw0ROkCJlyfm/7Mq4=;
	b=BPNnwR+Nx0+PDcbyY3+D8jmPZBFpdy7F5IilrCIpBGkTly9JPaGzlp8tH73wu/3lXY
	VpeW0EXuoUCb1mEBafh3aNgXMYKyrrVv93nKDJDyoiY/DA19HnR4cH1DZt1VdOJoAyG4
	JWmqjyPBXSVv5ninUQJ3MVejv4t6Q9BXuAZtsiYJ3TPDmbLiRTYpElaIsLSATB7B3q+t
	/F3Ffv9U40rOUcRlD+A4VW6FeOThhrORRiFmsVai2TPOf/DxDGgKxw5OD5LeXPZMvi6Z
	NwQizurou5MIT6VxNfeYxa8ZUdhTIS5pcnegdiFJQwqDQByrIDOAL1niwURDemKgDsjU
	EBgg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnFoLmJgWZ45wJhjqySigdCKB5CfdMXe5XW25ba+StvwlrGMUXbZ7bnbIJYhohnqm4QvbVw
X-Received: by 10.68.135.137 with SMTP id ps9mr3177484pbb.160.1398098300879;
	Mon, 21 Apr 2014 09:38:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.127.231] (50-0-36-93.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net.
	[50.0.36.93])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id n6sm79120928pbj.22.2014.04.21.09.38.18
	for <multiple recipients>
	(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
	Mon, 21 Apr 2014 09:38:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <53554979.9020206@monetize.io>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 09:38:17 -0700
From: Mark Friedenbach <mark@monetize.io>
Organization: Monetize.io Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paul Lyon <pmlyon@hotmail.ca>, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>, 
	Jonathan Levin <jonathan.levin@sant.ox.ac.uk>
References: <mailman.122233.1398039406.2207.bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	<52CDA01B-13BF-4BB8-AC9A-5FBBB324FD15@sant.ox.ac.uk>,
	<CACh7GpFGEvR+_qArYCkgi7AW4coSeH741ob4hmBpj6G3MayNAQ@mail.gmail.com>,
	<a9a262a9-c70f-470d-81e0-ca32c41d8dc5@email.android.com>,
	<53554089.1010503@monetize.io>
	<BLU170-W757A725FD907FDC49BF9F2A55E0@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BLU170-W757A725FD907FDC49BF9F2A55E0@phx.gbl>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
	no trust [209.85.192.176 listed in list.dnswl.org]
X-Headers-End: 1WcHEg-0001M1-WB
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Economics of information propagation
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, 21 Apr 2014 16:38:28 -0000

Yes, it certainly can be improved in this way. You can even extend the
idea to distribute partial proofs of work (block headers + Merkle lists
which represent significant but not sufficient work), and 'prime' your
memory pools with the transactions contained within.

This is, btw, basically what p2pool does, which is why last time I
calculated you get roughly 1% better return from p2pool than a zero-fee
mining pool would get you, specifically because of the lower stale rate.

On 04/21/2014 09:22 AM, Paul Lyon wrote:
> I haven't done the math on this, so it may be a terrible idea. :)
> 
> I've been wondering if block propagation times could also be improved by
> allowing peers to request the list of transaction hashes that make up a
> block, and then making a follow-up request to only download any
> transactions not currently known. I'm not sure what percentage of
> transactions a node will usually already have when it receives a new
> block, but if it's high I figure this could be beneficial.
>