1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
|
Return-Path: <jameson.lopp@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D3968EA
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 12:08:16 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-la0-f42.google.com (mail-la0-f42.google.com
[209.85.215.42])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C08EEE
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 12:08:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by laba3 with SMTP id a3so1582857lab.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 05:08:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=cTxC5WKlgcIIp2forM4LvEv7zZiiyFDCqZYD9/dNFFg=;
b=n3w1K25D7oxomr40MCnMRiFJYX3OHNtAA0sN5JoW6lx9U+ybZ2isP/mpCsMxX4xMYL
hhr0xhQe6TZdUzl67EaaNz3tVi7KXhZG6wh5H+8EL/6lnOx1sK0mYhd+19xyCvvJQKA4
LlYR2DEiasoDw9ggYxyv5B7suBmRjSWGsDugPTHcQZlCy3ucYDFkVmIf9t398DCslzwt
Z8XW1abGmZhfzd3ISc5rmzfGCmQXqsFfO+lyh1uWUrHiBXJeqbiQb5PgVHz+HRBIfxX/
03qsaV6Fh0Mrd5QlRBFNgGPPp7gfqfPsdd11Gcv2YbIWs65blweyDxjSYNXrPnBRNrX5
BFOA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.6.194 with SMTP id d2mr10873227laa.93.1439986093771;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 05:08:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.150.84 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 05:08:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAO2FKE44WqJOEaR2TYRwzAsPQxh7Z1K3esQiMFsSsk2+65-4w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAO2FKGS9+0pMa_iF+TNc7nnAqniE7vjTHapvubdce7=aSyBEg@mail.gmail.com>
<CADL_X_duSHosyMAfOXPv7WcWKTY19Q2i+_zFSuuGbGantbbmRw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAO2FKE44WqJOEaR2TYRwzAsPQxh7Z1K3esQiMFsSsk2+65-4w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:08:13 -0400
Message-ID: <CADL_X_dUd2MLt_P5+o=uS+LP_12ybRTGeq1WQzQY2m6kf6qtDA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jameson Lopp <jameson.lopp@gmail.com>
To: Hector Chu <hectorchu@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d186a99d326051da8e393
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A solution to increase the incentive of running a
node
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 12:08:16 -0000
--089e013d186a99d326051da8e393
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
If operating as an SPV node then it can check the transactions by querying
other nodes.
On an unrelated note, it sounds like your proposal will significantly
increase the data size of every transaction, which will create even more
contention for block space.
- Jameson
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Hector Chu <hectorchu@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 19 August 2015 at 12:42, Jameson Lopp <jameson.lopp@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If you can actually come up with a technical solution that allows for a
> node
> > operator to prove to the rest of the network that they are running an
> honest
> > full node that hosts the entire blockchain, then you can move forward
> with a
> > direct monetary incentivization proposal. To my knowledge no one has been
> > successful in that endeavor. To be more clear, your proposal would need
> to
> > be able to differentiate between a full node and a pseudonode.
> > https://github.com/basil00/PseudoNode
>
> The proof is in the validation of transactions. How can a node
> reliably validate transactions unless it has the past history of
> transactions? Entire blockchain not required or necessary, but that's
> a plus.
>
--089e013d186a99d326051da8e393
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div>If operating as an SPV node then it can check th=
e transactions by querying other nodes. <br></div><br>On
an unrelated note, it sounds like your proposal will significantly=20
increase the data size of every transaction, which will create even more
contention for block space.<br><br></div>- Jameson<br></div><div class=3D"=
gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 7:48 AM=
, Hector Chu <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:hectorchu@gmail.com" t=
arget=3D"_blank">hectorchu@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote c=
lass=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;=
padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">On 19 August 2015 at 12:42, Jameson Lopp=
<<a href=3D"mailto:jameson.lopp@gmail.com">jameson.lopp@gmail.com</a>&g=
t; wrote:<br>
> If you can actually come up with a technical solution that allows for =
a node<br>
> operator to prove to the rest of the network that they are running an =
honest<br>
> full node that hosts the entire blockchain, then you can move forward =
with a<br>
> direct monetary incentivization proposal. To my knowledge no one has b=
een<br>
> successful in that endeavor. To be more clear, your proposal would nee=
d to<br>
> be able to differentiate between a full node and a pseudonode.<br>
> <a href=3D"https://github.com/basil00/PseudoNode" rel=3D"noreferrer" t=
arget=3D"_blank">https://github.com/basil00/PseudoNode</a><br>
<br>
</span>The proof is in the validation of transactions. How can a node<br>
reliably validate transactions unless it has the past history of<br>
transactions? Entire blockchain not required or necessary, but that's<b=
r>
a plus.<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
--089e013d186a99d326051da8e393--
|
