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
|
Return-Path: <dustinpaystaxes@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71936D13
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:16:11 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-io1-f53.google.com (mail-io1-f53.google.com
[209.85.166.53])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CED1224
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:16:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-io1-f53.google.com with SMTP id k20so74674958ios.10
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 22 Jul 2019 08:16:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=R4w2OAGrXMEKhRBNKTZL1bMomVl+ZRAOaGmxcCtBPPA=;
b=h/Ehagy9PIL6/zF2sYMwBTd8YantZn5sgT9LPEJAoS7ha1TxWPZO5fXEJQVI1hnDFW
B6E2J5302WEYNQYRiepb7iggfuyJ0Z5ufOeF0GGnpMJSZ9U3iOQIyhuf6yi0dbKD+Z9g
rO9UIeIanLcNRkEpwa1LlTXhHpmXtP9VOJxl/Ww3syxPm2Yc9W6ZliIIiLymyh1EesMr
ymBZN4CK+xf9olOz8p50ynQ0EGfGhUcocWERCB9+ghgxRnqfENr7nPz02jcej/sBTHV7
tBn1myQvqbx7/BkvMN7gDe8sxaSpntODdDLcBbE+Tt/oMBWnKxqK5GExoQACf/tmeaQ8
eYZg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
:message-id:subject:to;
bh=R4w2OAGrXMEKhRBNKTZL1bMomVl+ZRAOaGmxcCtBPPA=;
b=eaDMuRdkja46wA8aZq3E8v2LwjLwUOs50ei6x3AHvT88ABpyvKRQbvNbfWHX8QqLsi
Rh7GTv0hxBOZebmzQwWjR7hLoMzP2iT3Yx998xxij2r0bsoOFaHyDodNJICiVzNPAaZP
6CTjjJkB9GLg37yZLF151j0l247AbX0HojJDIJ8ZT3xVIMdDfIJ9sfb6MYep+JJNqhJ+
tXR/jenPIEcNRvt2X22cLsVZwmDYsgED6+h3gYDMPV6HU7vDrFeek7Z+BM9kOY+RTjak
Mc1fei56UosI9gpjGtbLlbpL1A5vbET5dx1Lxg5e/0ZZTXESlF0WtscqbH3wmPoJtM0J
NhOA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUQ6O/0DPqBAezGQjdDUPzzSUrV9qNkrRfsQ2oJVunxwCrFu4DK
BzhWe46QXeWeLshYhw1a5DbYLlgC9n0i4a+W+NEWMHm7
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyG44BgLYVnk2aQCXvuTcMNaFYGH+Gn2iSCpAPUZyfxyUu42TqZ245l7C4KEBXV0qB4kmirMJXi+SY582BgsTs=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:915a:: with SMTP id y26mr66319416ioq.207.1563808561443;
Mon, 22 Jul 2019 08:16:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <59fad2b6-9b15-ffec-116e-91d27ce29f80@mattcorallo.com>
<d02da3a7-5afe-4a3f-0ed0-464751a6aff1@thinlink.com>
In-Reply-To: <d02da3a7-5afe-4a3f-0ed0-464751a6aff1@thinlink.com>
From: Dustin Dettmer <dustinpaystaxes@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 08:15:49 -0700
Message-ID: <CABLeJxSrie0jpPmb6WsFJZg9esyS8bmug7F=tN2bm2f=FHruKw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cd3be6058e468dd7"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 16:40:07 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core to disable Bloom-based Filtering by
default
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:16:11 -0000
--000000000000cd3be6058e468dd7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Has someone built an analysis of how much extra bandwidth CFB uses over
bloom filters?
Obviously an active merchant in an impoverished country paying data rates
per MB will never be able to afford CFB =E2=80=94 so those people are being=
cut out
of Bitcoin entirely. I suppose the plan is they will rely on custodial
services now?
But if someone receives say, 5 tx a day, how much more bandwidth precisely
will CFB require over bloom?
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 8:10 AM Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On 7/20/19 10:46 AM, Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > (less trustful and privacy-violating) alternative
> > over the coming years.
>
> The same paper that established the 'privacy-violating' conventional
> wisdom presented mitigations which have seen little exploration.
> https://eprint.iacr.org/2014/763.pdf
>
> Meanwhile we have custodial LN, the L-BTC altcoin and, today, a massive
> push into infrastructure for fully custodial accounts.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
--000000000000cd3be6058e468dd7
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div><div dir=3D"auto">Has someone built an analysis of how much extra band=
width CFB uses over bloom filters?</div></div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><=
div dir=3D"auto">Obviously an active merchant in an impoverished country pa=
ying data rates per MB will never be able to afford CFB =E2=80=94 so those =
people are being cut out of Bitcoin entirely. I suppose the plan is they wi=
ll rely on custodial services now?</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div di=
r=3D"auto">But if someone receives say, 5 tx a day, how much more bandwidth=
precisely will CFB require over bloom?</div><div><br><div class=3D"gmail_q=
uote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 8:10 AM=
Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev <<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxf=
oundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br></di=
v><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:=
1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 7/20/19 10:46 AM, Matt Corallo via bitc=
oin-dev wrote:<br>
> (less trustful and privacy-violating) alternative<br>
> over the coming years.<br>
<br>
The same paper that established the 'privacy-violating' conventiona=
l <br>
wisdom presented mitigations which have seen little exploration. <br>
<a href=3D"https://eprint.iacr.org/2014/763.pdf" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=
=3D"_blank">https://eprint.iacr.org/2014/763.pdf</a><br>
<br>
Meanwhile we have custodial LN, the L-BTC altcoin and, today, a massive <br=
>
push into infrastructure for fully custodial accounts.<br>
<br>
<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></div>
--000000000000cd3be6058e468dd7--
|
