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
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
|
Return-Path: <chauhanansh.me@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFB6CC002D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 3 Aug 2022 15:40:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3959414CE
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 3 Aug 2022 15:40:47 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org D3959414CE
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org;
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com
header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=B5LkAyjf
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id ZADBiwrLYASe
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 3 Aug 2022 15:40:46 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 7E235408ED
Received: from mail-il1-x129.google.com (mail-il1-x129.google.com
[IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::129])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E235408ED
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 3 Aug 2022 15:40:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-il1-x129.google.com with SMTP id o14so3696214ilt.2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 03 Aug 2022 08:40:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to:from:date:message-id
:subject:to; bh=IJpOa0wHlKQTyj8SOTI9hTx/Ps6lLVACmHAwtR0HQB0=;
b=B5LkAyjfX87E2BM8oF+vw4S6Hd+7NFwHb2V3oO1HbQDv7KwCdMAA55V+4VAS4LdlTp
w79vv8lQlV3ZFR5pjofE7yx+fjhPI9Pw+CdJwaZpk0s/v0Vhk5hcI4PsnWX2JM5NOD6Y
DY49pLjCT2qe8XDl5aOuaJPcLpi0S1i9W/CScnxYZHf07gwzO4t5WcWz/7HuyOhmlBJa
OYw77gTEQJNGmf5MVGsf/4xjtSJGLYUFeCJ/RWtJT6gkYheQZ04UIKfUIGUIua+NfTSE
HN+TJWsTwds7ORUwi4AkDRJYtjsaPB3ptqhJiTCKLuKOApbVqBeFXe+uVrB3wNaLyusg
mAhA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to
:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=IJpOa0wHlKQTyj8SOTI9hTx/Ps6lLVACmHAwtR0HQB0=;
b=dpfVWFqFzcTekO0on30kylW3tMc5dbE3YlB4Et8Oow7ze2xoBpiBVybY92Uj45iyhg
23UprF+6PsnpMpysLoGcqdDtktphrZNEE5lrWuf4Vy4AnluvFnGVnWq+bmgVY3Qrmdy5
Y8TDV+afB2/fB6rU4Dpj87wKvgB7DUk3QWwrp5Sx08ZTUzSFGN9ZOGUeYZygG/gJ70wu
x8hABbsGflOQK34gSfRGohPF64Gtq2v2inZhnVTUYyTE0pV19ndi7ehU9QCu79K9VBxr
5jamXj8SU1v9AVTm9m/3dRoRRZ4w6xx5tu62skcjbdGO5fcxigct3SgIn2/lQalDGp7m
yppQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo1yzP3vfDE7EtxeVD7JNIUEUg48z2iBwG+d0+HB3HPuwqNKn6xa
Zu9Nj62rFOT+G+ZyJEytbkw9oPpYkpX71OmbvQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR5LDTB8iJFw339/sxDK5PjWcc/L1S3fGLuCBlIEGwQYkj3EAA/2v/mR7Yj19wr8wxa3pYoV8OUL4ENK+1/MJz4=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:b4a:b0:2df:12cf:f8c7 with SMTP id
f10-20020a056e020b4a00b002df12cff8c7mr2073632ilu.214.1659541245487; Wed, 03
Aug 2022 08:40:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAGHFe1BXdTkPZn4r_KTxYoz0sqcMsV830dm5JTTFURxDezBnDQ@mail.gmail.com>
<Yt/h2Jv3m8ZsfZ8v@petertodd.org> <f889c7fc9db56ed448237c8a4091abaa@dtrt.org>
<CAGHFe1C-u7DbTtg0dz+p8Moh=FbFN5dKZow5HgtMpxcVyS2ZdA@mail.gmail.com>
<JMG4yhnQ2xL1Pq51Jnyk37c6-Ip8zHuCjmPWc6AYJ0LxlhO7enV9xdr4YGkGbn_J-ecpueZsB-mIjowyVDyMINme1bXJk4BYYP7lBxR4Kfg=@protonmail.com>
<YuerLzSvdJ8ZcqrR@petertodd.org>
<bKNhJ_ASFgsOslPnOxW-ps5h2OUbHbVQfOelaLPey8lxezLEuevkua1WpAtVRNPRmCtj0fRAeOSe5OHWYOSafczcBuGzhRDqbVjGctAUdBI=@protonmail.com>
<YufXK6ayn8ZcBzYN@petertodd.org>
In-Reply-To: <YufXK6ayn8ZcBzYN@petertodd.org>
Reply-To: aaradhya@technovanti.co.in
From: Aaradhya Chauhan <chauhanansh.me@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2022 21:10:34 +0530
Message-ID: <CAGHFe1BsDnxn6nuoMwCtt56YjaXmT0mPZ6XnMJZpyC2Fa7e9aQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006d6fea05e5580ee7"
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 03 Aug 2022 16:19:02 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Regarding setting a lower minrelaytxfee
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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, 03 Aug 2022 15:40:48 -0000
--0000000000006d6fea05e5580ee7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
So, can we conclude by something, whether or not it would be possible and
feasible in the future?
On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 at 19:08, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 01:19:05PM +0000, aliashraf.btc At protonmail
> wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jul 30, 2022 at 05:24:35PM +0000, alicexbt via bitcoin-dev
> wrote:
> > > like a hashcash-based alternative broadcast scheme.
> > Hi Peter,
> > I've been mulling the idea of attaching work to low fee txns, both as a
> compensation (e.g., in a sidechain, or an alt), and/or as a spam proof.
> Unfortunately, both suffer from ASICs:
> > For spam proof case, the adversary can easily buy a used/obsolete device
> to produce lots of spam txns very cheaply, unless you put the bar very
> high, making it almost impossible for average users to even try.
> > The compensation scenario is pretty off-topic, still, interesting enough
> for 1 min read:
> > Wallets commit to the latest blockchain state in the transaction AND
> attach work.
> > It is considered contribution to the security (illegitimate chains can't
> include the txn), hence isrewarded by fee discount/exemption depending on
> the offset of the state they've committed to (the closer, the better) and
> the amount of work attached.
> > For this to work, block difficulty is calculated inclusive with the work
> embedded in the txns, it contains. Sophisticated and consequential, yet not
> infeasible per se.
> >
> > Unfortunately, this scheme is hard to balance with ASICs in the scene
> too, for instance, you can't subsidize wallets for their work like with a
> leverge, because miners can easily do it locally, seizing the subsidies for
> themselves, long story, not relevant just ignore it.
>
> We're not talking about a consensus system here. Just a way to rate-limit
> access to a broadcast network used by a small minority of nodes. It's
> completely ok to simply change the PoW algorithm in the _highly_ unlikely
> event
> someone bothers to build an ASIC for it. Since this isn't a consensu
> system,
> it's totally ok if multiple versions of the scheme run in parallel.
>
> --
> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
--0000000000006d6fea05e5580ee7
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">So, can we conclude by something, whether or not it would =
be possible and feasible in the future?</div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"=
><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 at 19:08, Peter T=
odd via bitcoin-dev <<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation=
.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockq=
uote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-wi=
dth:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-=
left:1ex">On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 01:19:05PM +0000, aliashraf.btc At proton=
mail wrote:<br>
> > On Sat, Jul 30, 2022 at 05:24:35PM +0000, alicexbt via bitcoin-de=
v wrote:<br>
> > like a hashcash-based alternative broadcast scheme.<br>
> Hi Peter,<br>
> I've been mulling the idea of attaching work to low fee txns, both=
as a compensation (e.g., in a sidechain, or an alt), and/or as a spam proo=
f. Unfortunately, both suffer from ASICs:<br>
> For spam proof case, the adversary can easily buy a used/obsolete devi=
ce to produce lots of spam txns very cheaply, unless you put the bar very h=
igh, making it almost impossible for average users to even try.<br>
> The compensation scenario is pretty off-topic, still, interesting enou=
gh for 1 min read:<br>
> Wallets commit to the latest blockchain state in the transaction AND a=
ttach work.<br>
> It is considered contribution to the security (illegitimate chains can=
't include the txn), hence isrewarded by fee discount/exemption dependi=
ng on the offset of the state they've committed to (the closer, the bet=
ter) and the amount of work attached.<br>
> For this to work, block difficulty is calculated inclusive with the wo=
rk embedded in the txns, it contains. Sophisticated and consequential, yet =
not infeasible per se.<br>
> <br>
> Unfortunately, this scheme is hard to balance with ASICs in the scene =
too, for instance, you can't subsidize wallets for their work like with=
a leverge, because miners can easily do it locally, seizing the subsidies =
for themselves, long story, not relevant just ignore it.<br>
<br>
We're not talking about a consensus system here. Just a way to rate-lim=
it<br>
access to a broadcast network used by a small minority of nodes. It's<b=
r>
completely ok to simply change the PoW algorithm in the _highly_ unlikely e=
vent<br>
someone bothers to build an ASIC for it. Since this isn't a consensu sy=
stem,<br>
it's totally ok if multiple versions of the scheme run in parallel.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
<a href=3D"https://petertodd.org" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">http=
s://petertodd.org</a> 'peter'[:-1]@<a href=3D"http://petertodd.org"=
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">petertodd.org</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
--0000000000006d6fea05e5580ee7--
|
