Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
	designates 62.13.149.75 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=62.13.149.75; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
	helo=outmail149075.authsmtp.net; 
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 13:13:24 -0500
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Thomas Voegtlin <thomasv1@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <20140106181324.GB28880@petertodd.org>
References: <52B3A1C8.5000005@monetize.io>
 <52C9A7EE.2050904@gmx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="v9Ux+11Zm5mwPlX6"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <52C9A7EE.2050904@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP proposal: Authenticated prefix trees
Precedence: list


--v9Ux+11Zm5mwPlX6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 07:43:58PM +0100, Thomas Voegtlin wrote:
> Hello and happy new year to this mailing list!
>=20
>=20
> Thank you Mark for the incredible work you've been doing on this.
> I am following this very closely, because it is of primary importance
> for Electrum.
>=20
> I have written a Python-levelDB implementation of this UTXO hashtree,
> which is currently being tested, and will be added to Electrum servers.

Along the lines of my recent post on blockchain data:

Is it going to be possible to do partial prefix queries on that tree?

Also have you considered creating per-block indexes of all
scriptPubKeys, spent or unspent, queryable via the same partial prefix
method?

> I too believe that BIPs should define interoperability points, but probab=
ly
> not implementation details. For the UTXO hashtree, this means that a BIP
> should at least specify how the root hash is constructed. This might be t=
he
> only thing that needs to be specified.
>=20
> However, I see no pressing issue with writing a BIP; it might be preferab=
le
> to implement and test different options first, and learn from that.

It'd be very good to test this stuff thoroughly on Electrum first and
get a feel for the performance and usability before any soft-fork to
make it a miner commitment.

Similarly a C++ implementation should be simply added to Bitcoin Core as
a bloom filter replacement and made available over the P2P network.

--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000000009bc28e08b41a74801c5878bf87978c2486aee7ed8a85778

--v9Ux+11Zm5mwPlX6
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJSyvJEAAoJEBmcgzuo5/CFJLAH/RC8eHnzdrXrUZi6Z0Nyej50
zHICeAhEsQZaF2+18wdrie/lzsFSok2nH7FJn5q/BSEsS//0V5G4ME17wleiH6CV
iIpxj17hrrGcL+iIeKnRlnUgu0jMWRFcvvT9vUCpy/yo9YKMJNJAjHyTvyWBAXIM
6IJnf3ooJeRZ1STZSnhdYMrD+NPONKMlUdGgFoqJ5W9U8UNWRcmyzN9erudvG9of
uVOVDbP3EzJX+qOVt+X4tK/jJAgWv51GxRa4Y51Qq10fjZ9qTpYhej+saoxpsNAs
cCAeb7nTymOW7ryMBY51Aft17GuyswNFs+QZjVzGl3qZr5qwMZOXcBmO7/eK7y0=
=l3ES
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--v9Ux+11Zm5mwPlX6--