From: William Casarin <jb55@jb55.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <CABaSBaw_1WfCEiBXtVxPgJ=UMWji=MwxkVTeKX-BbuVb9N_h5g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADH-5r0m0zUP545hN=Or3v8ujixeKZpLqqja0M+5wuZZOWhO4A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABaSBaw_1WfCEiBXtVxPgJ=UMWji=MwxkVTeKX-BbuVb9N_h5g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 11:07:04 -0800
Message-ID: <87k1yobu7b.fsf@jb55.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Protocol-Level Pruning
Precedence: list

Bryan Bishop via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
writes:

> It's not clear to me if you are have looked at the previous UTXO set
> commitment proposals.
>
> some utxo set commitment bookmarks (a little old)
> http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/irc/bitcoin/utxo-commitments-or-fraud-proofs.stdout.txt
>
> TXO bitfields
> http://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/sf-bitcoin-meetup/2017-07-08-bram-cohen-merkle-sets/
>
> delayed TXO commitments
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-May/012715.html
>
> TXO commitments do not need a soft-fork to be useful
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-February/013591.html
>
> rolling UTXO set hashes
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-May/014337.html
>
> lotta other resources available, including source code proposals..

Thanks!

Has anyone categoried list discussions by topic like this? It seems a
lot of this stuff is scattered between mailing lists, irc conversations,
etc and can be hard to know whats floating out there.

-- 
https://jb55.com