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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <laanwj@gmail.com>) id 1WXwLc-0002RJ-9Z
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 09 Apr 2014 17:31:40 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.223.179 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.223.179; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ie0-f179.google.com;
Received: from mail-ie0-f179.google.com ([209.85.223.179])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WXwLb-0000rJ-HK
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 09 Apr 2014 17:31:40 +0000
Received: by mail-ie0-f179.google.com with SMTP id lx4so2670854iec.24
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Wed, 09 Apr 2014 10:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.42.88.79 with SMTP id b15mr2410617icm.65.1397064694217; Wed,
09 Apr 2014 10:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.70.131 with HTTP; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 10:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAt2M18z_Qkqat1OETiXAz0QQey4+y5J6=pC7nkoJfyfrpj3=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+s+GJCn9U2kmyMH6w3o+m99NCfO0ws=SccvGBYJv07WVuF=eA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAt2M18z_Qkqat1OETiXAz0QQey4+y5J6=pC7nkoJfyfrpj3=A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 19:31:34 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+s+GJBeXM_Ls-Xo1TWqkfyrD4ga8fve5ndpzsvr56wm-2xJyQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: Natanael <natanael.l@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba3fccc3d3c3c504f69f7805
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
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
(laanwj[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
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: 1WXwLb-0000rJ-HK
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoind-in-background mode for SPV
wallets
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 17:31:40 -0000
--90e6ba3fccc3d3c3c504f69f7805
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Natanael <natanael.l@gmail.com> wrote:
> This could probably be done fairly easily by bundling Stratum (it's
> not just for pools!) and allowing SPV wallets to ask Bitcoind to start
> it (if you don't use it, there's no need to waste the resources), and
> then connect to it. The point of using Stratum is that it already is
> being used by Electrum, and that it might be an easier way to support
> SPV clients than creating a new API in bitcoind for it since Stratum
> itself already relies on bitcoind to provide it's services.
>
Why would a new API be needed? (beside maybe some functionality that would
make it easier to integrate)
P2P should be enough for SPV clients such as BitcoinJ to get access to
(filtered) blocks and transations, and RPC can be used to manage/query the
bitcoind instance. I'm not sure what stratum would add.
Wladimir
--90e6ba3fccc3d3c3c504f69f7805
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Natanael <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:natanael.l@gmail.com" target="_blank">natanael.l@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">This could probably be done fairly easily by bundling Stratum (it's<br>
not just for pools!) and allowing SPV wallets to ask Bitcoind to start<br>
it (if you don't use it, there's no need to waste the resources), and<br>
then connect to it. The point of using Stratum is that it already is<br>
being used by Electrum, and that it might be an easier way to support<br>
SPV clients than creating a new API in bitcoind for it since Stratum<br>
itself already relies on bitcoind to provide it's services.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Why would a new API be needed? (beside maybe some functionality that would make it easier to integrate)<br><br></div><div>
P2P should be enough for SPV clients such as BitcoinJ to get access to (filtered) blocks and transations, and RPC can be used to manage/query the bitcoind instance. I'm not sure what stratum would add. <br><br>Wladimir<br>
</div></div></div></div>
--90e6ba3fccc3d3c3c504f69f7805--
|
