Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0917D9F0 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2018 16:06:56 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-it0-f42.google.com (mail-it0-f42.google.com [209.85.214.42]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A026796 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2018 16:06:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f42.google.com with SMTP id h1-v6so5920539itj.4 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2018 09:06:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ryPAv+tG605le0dqCfLI51ofVKzqAaFpA7+mdFA5c+4=; b=MbxmJ5LDHNILpCdgHYA0rZZGoJjeGMgXI8SaCH+K2ybhmLjfmO0rzvareqttkUiPDq hn5KQJ2vQgtYU8dhtXZrkHlmPi9xI3xW2VcVMWS958hA7+E46umb7BqCdgJ5ZXsBiaTR sBJQuUFrEoKjp2PUQOqTtVVqHMyd5d51ekEqHx+2TxEMp71HUtsgQSbtmjWASRZK1Zow Hizpdy5wxi3PQQ68Z73K2FKWWunN1mfMpB7Uyfw2hhlUujD33lqtFgMQKyELm7dC8H2O Qr5TYfpSOYoHXLPHL6/ehQuj4mcRhlH4iSVNZW6Epiqf5hf6qP09O+BVMsJRApVfucp6 O/1g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ryPAv+tG605le0dqCfLI51ofVKzqAaFpA7+mdFA5c+4=; b=lZVX9ocwTNTDq+rrLoM9n34rn523t7SXPmudMRB+G+RrkS8NaJ77CJ/snk3Jz+5stZ XsOGDOP4vPLpBFGHfejF9+if9ChbPQI+ptHW5/oSbhGeSuJSEEPYdEgbzHSEap3YLhal 42/8vYF38VKI2ja/vwXwgiDbw5iJ81pKmbVAWwIiIa8Tiddd2EDB4ChLZn+F46T8tl0I +WZlvejW0+NB+3hpSlTBKwCWzNWrDTom5q1ZkteoYZ2ztxTo0reLwnm39RGPG/aZVuWy FLBuAtNxGvPgRRcyDNwSUrxi/Meg8UtrKucI84IHND71jG7tkAJbkKLk7w/Pk6kjOf+g ryUQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51CvKNm3AezqVOLAZ8NgH33LExw+3+jsJshpvdIwV88DaXBwuq2y rJFB3gEyQUPZ83uHYc6wyV/PAutqrHGKFwc93M5LwmU5 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdZeTgGFBrAAGnrUhqdRvIdGdu6a9pATZZYSMTrqldYzbfINThaNniPmPYKdsCda2aZIGfiDhtxnuuZC9DH8GOc= X-Received: by 2002:a02:85a3:: with SMTP id d32-v6mr5751005jai.119.1535558814440; Wed, 29 Aug 2018 09:06:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8AE1517F-88FB-479D-AE89-993A5545D210@jonasschnelli.ch> <758E3CA7-295B-4B77-BFF5-9AAE959D53EA@voskuil.org> In-Reply-To: <758E3CA7-295B-4B77-BFF5-9AAE959D53EA@voskuil.org> From: Blockchain Group Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 21:36:43 +0530 Message-ID: To: Eric Voskuil Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000aaa5570574952567" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 16:10:14 +0000 Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Building a Bitcoin API and query system. X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 16:06:56 -0000 --000000000000aaa5570574952567 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks! That is what my main point is. On Wed, Aug 29, 2018, 8:10 PM Eric Voskuil wrote: > The API implementation is not what is centralizing, nor is full indexatio= n > non-scalable. The centralization is in not running the API from a node > under your own control. This is of course implied by the comment, =E2=80= =9Cwithout > the need for syncing=E2=80=9D. In other words it is the deployment cost o= f the node > that is centralizing. > > Yet if people relied only on bitcoind and never centralized services ther= e > would be *no* block explorers (and no secure light wallets), because it > does not provide remote query and does not fully index. > > Block explorers and light wallets are pretty useful, so presumably some > API must provide these features (ideally with reduced deployment cost). > That will either be centralized or decentralized services. As such it see= ms > wise to encourage the latter, as opposed to questioning whether there is > any valid block explorer use case. > > e > > > > On Aug 28, 2018, at 11:36, Jonas Schnelli via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > To give a critical viewpoint on a such API: > > > > Such APIs usually result in central validation, meaning that users trus= t > API services rather the validating their own data. It break some of the > fundamental properties of Bitcoin (avoid trusted third parties). > > Systems or applications depending on a full indexed blockchain (a thus > such API) do usually scale pretty bad. > > > > I=E2=80=99d like to hear some concrete use-cases for a such block explo= rer(ish) > API. > > > > Thanks > > =E2=80=94 > > Jonas > > > >> Am 26.08.2018 um 21:58 schrieb Blockchain Group via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>: > >> > >> Hello everyone, > >> > >> I am C++ & Node.js developer. I want to propose making a new Bitcoin > API that supports fast quering of Bitcoin blocks and transactions without > the need for syncing with all previous nodes. > >> > >> In a typical case where I want to build a full fleged Bitcoin explorer > cum wallet system on my end with external APIs, I need to sync my node an= d > then query for the information I need to show separately. I am proposing = a > unified method of finding/quering the blockchain data with a standardized > template containing minimal information about the actual mined block or > transaction yet satify the need of what I want to query. > >> > >> I am working on making a template and a support mechanism on Node.js. = I > want to propose it as an improvement (BIP). It will be a great help to > future web developers who want to make something similar. > >> > >> Thanks > >> Sumit Lahiri. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> bitcoin-dev mailing list > >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > bitcoin-dev mailing list > > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > --000000000000aaa5570574952567 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks! That is what my main point is.=C2=A0

On Wed, Aug 29, 2018, 8:10 PM Eric= Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org> w= rote:
The API implementation is not= what is centralizing, nor is full indexation non-scalable. The centralizat= ion is in not running the API from a node under your own control. This is o= f course implied by the comment, =E2=80=9Cwithout the need for syncing=E2= =80=9D. In other words it is the deployment cost of the node that is centra= lizing.

Yet if people relied only on bitcoind and never centralized services there = would be *no* block explorers (and no secure light wallets), because it doe= s not provide remote query and does not fully index.

Block explorers and light wallets are pretty useful, so presumably some API= must provide these features (ideally with reduced deployment cost). That w= ill either be centralized or decentralized services. As such it seems wise = to encourage the latter, as opposed to questioning whether there is any val= id block explorer use case.

e


> On Aug 28, 2018, at 11:36, Jonas Schnelli via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> To give a critical viewpoint on a such API:
>
> Such APIs usually result in central validation, meaning that users tru= st API services rather the validating their own data. It break some of the = fundamental properties of Bitcoin (avoid trusted third parties).
> Systems or applications depending on a full indexed blockchain (a thus= such API) do usually scale pretty bad.
>
> I=E2=80=99d like to hear some concrete use-cases for a such block expl= orer(ish) API.
>
> Thanks
> =E2=80=94
> Jonas
>
>> Am 26.08.2018 um 21:58 schrieb Blockchain Group via bitcoin-dev &l= t;bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>:
>>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I am C++ & Node.js developer. I want to propose making a new B= itcoin API that supports fast quering of Bitcoin blocks and transactions wi= thout the need for syncing with all previous nodes.
>>
>> In a typical case where I want to build a full fleged Bitcoin expl= orer cum wallet system on my end with external APIs, I need to sync my node= and then query for the information I need to show separately. I am proposi= ng a unified method of finding/quering the blockchain data with a standardi= zed template containing minimal information about the actual mined block or= transaction yet satify the need of what I want to query.
>>
>> I am working on making a template and a support mechanism on Node.= js. I want to propose it as an improvement (BIP). It will be a great help t= o future web developers who want to make something similar.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Sumit Lahiri.
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linu= xfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfou= ndation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--000000000000aaa5570574952567--