Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WXECt-0007pd-JP for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 07 Apr 2014 18:23:43 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.219.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.219.47; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f47.google.com; Received: from mail-oa0-f47.google.com ([209.85.219.47]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WXECs-0006Eu-DL for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 07 Apr 2014 18:23:43 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id i11so7132412oag.34 for ; Mon, 07 Apr 2014 11:23:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.76.194 with SMTP id m2mr8515839oew.47.1396895017022; Mon, 07 Apr 2014 11:23:37 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.96.180 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 11:23:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6D430188-CE00-44B1-BD8C-B623CF04D466@icloudtools.net> References: <5342C833.5030906@gmail.com> <6D430188-CE00-44B1-BD8C-B623CF04D466@icloudtools.net> Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 20:23:36 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: aSHqr6mox6nPElFCPrqDVHtC21c Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Chris Williams Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b33cea6473f9704f677f7c0 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1WXECs-0006Eu-DL Cc: Bitcoin Development Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Why are we bleeding nodes? X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 18:23:43 -0000 --047d7b33cea6473f9704f677f7c0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > * Sent 456.5 gb data > > At my geographic service location (Singapore), this cost about $90 last > month for bandwidth alone. One of the reasons I initiated the (now stalled) PayFile project was in anticipation of this problem: https://github.com/mikehearn/PayFile http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0BXnWlnIi4&feature=youtu.be At some point if you want to actually download and validate the full block chain from scratch, you will have to start paying for it I'm sure. In the meantime: 1. Getting headers-first implemented and rolled out everywhere would reduce the amount of redundant downloading and hopefully reduce transmit traffic network-wide. 2. Implementing chain pruning would allow people to control upload bandwidth consumption by reducing the amount of disk storage they allow. --047d7b33cea6473f9704f677f7c0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
* Sent 456.5 gb data

At my geographic service location (Singapore), this cost about $90 last mon= th for bandwidth alone.

One of the reasons = I initiated the (now stalled) PayFile project was in anticipation of this p= roblem:


At some point if you want to actually download and vali= date the full block chain from scratch, you will have to start paying for i= t I'm sure.

In the meantime:
  1. Getting headers-first implemented and rolled out everywhere would reduc= e the amount of redundant downloading and hopefully reduce transmit traffic= network-wide.
  2. Implementing chain pruning would allow people to= control upload bandwidth consumption by reducing the amount of disk storag= e they allow.

--047d7b33cea6473f9704f677f7c0--