Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71182C0037 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 09:32:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35BA94376A for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 09:32:36 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 35BA94376A X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mmtADYdidUhz for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 09:32:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 498 seconds by postgrey-1.37 at util1.osuosl.org; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 09:32:34 UTC DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org B1BA540114 Received: from sokrates5.ch-meta.net (sokrates5.ch-meta.net [80.74.145.95]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1BA540114 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 09:32:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpclient.apple (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sokrates5.ch-meta.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3BE7C80404AD; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 10:24:13 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: sokrates.metanet.ch; spf=pass (sender IP is 2001:4060:c005:2410:de:1ed8:dac6:b85) smtp.mailfrom=dev@jonasschnelli.ch smtp.helo=smtpclient.apple Received-SPF: pass (sokrates.metanet.ch: connection is authenticated) From: Jonas Schnelli Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.300.61.1.2\)) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 10:24:02 +0100 References: To: Tom Briar , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.300.61.1.2) Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Compressed Bitcoin Transactions X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 09:32:36 -0000 One point to add here is that, while V1 non-encrypted p2p traffic could = be compressed on a different OSI layer in theory, v2 encrypted traffic = =E2=80=93 due to its pseudorandom nature =E2=80=93 will likely have no = size savings and thus need to be compressed on the application layer = with a proposal like this. Would be nice to see size comparison of this compression proposal vs = LZO/gzip compression of legacy transaction encoding. A possible advantage of this proposal is that it could save more space = with less CPU impact, which might be important for block propagation. Previous discussion about compressing blocks before sending them: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6973 /jonas > Am 16.01.2024 um 18:08 schrieb Tom Briar via bitcoin-dev = : >=20 > Hi, >=20 > In addition to the use cases listed in the schema, such as = steganography, satellite, and radio broadcast, an application can be = made for Peer-to-peer communication between Bitcoin nodes. Except when = compressing the Txid/Vout, which is optional, Transactions can gain up = to 30% size savings while still being completely reversible. = Furthermore, in a BIP-324 world, these savings are nontrivial. >=20 > BIP-324: = https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0324.mediawiki > Compressed Transaction Schema: compressed_transactions.md >=20 > Thanks- > Tom. > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev