Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.192.49 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.192.49; envelope-from=kevinsisco61784@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-qg0-f49.google.com; 
Message-ID: <534592F5.2000407@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 14:35:33 -0400
From: Kevin <kevinsisco61784@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
	rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
References: <CA+s+GJCn9U2kmyMH6w3o+m99NCfO0ws=SccvGBYJv07WVuF=eA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJCn9U2kmyMH6w3o+m99NCfO0ws=SccvGBYJv07WVuF=eA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="------------030901030209010306070109"
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoind-in-background mode for SPV
	wallets
Precedence: list

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------030901030209010306070109
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 4/9/2014 11:29 AM, Wladimir wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This is primarily aimed at developers of SPV wallets.
>
> The recently reported decrease in number of full nodes could have 
> several reasons, one of them that less people are running Bitcoin Core 
> for the wallet because the other wallets are getting ahead in both 
> features and useability.
>
> It's great to see innovation in wallets, but it's worrying that the 
> number of full nodes decreases.
>
> It may be that lots of people would support the network by running a 
> full node, but don't want to go through the trouble of installing 
> bitcoin core separately (and get confused because it's a wallet, too).
>
> Hence I'd like to explore the idea of adding an option to popular SPV 
> wallets, to spin a bitcoind process in the background. This could be 
> pretty much transparent to the user - it would sync in the background, 
> the wallet could show statistics about the node, but is not dependent 
> on it.
>
> In exchange the user would get increased (full node level) security, 
> as the SPV wallet would have a local trusted node.
>
> Does this sound like a good idea?
>
> Is there any way that Bitcoin Core can help to accomedate this 
> 'embedded' usage? Specific Interfaces, special builds - maybe add a 
> walletless bitcoind build to gitian - bindings, dlls, etc?
>
> Wladimir
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Put Bad Developers to Shame
> Dominate Development with Jenkins Continuous Integration
> Continuously Automate Build, Test & Deployment
> Start a new project now. Try Jenkins in the cloud.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/13600_Cloudbees
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
I personally like the ida.  Are you talking about a flag that could 
toggle this "in the background" mode or recoding for in the background use?


-- 
Kevin


--------------030901030209010306070109
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/9/2014 11:29 AM, Wladimir wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CA+s+GJCn9U2kmyMH6w3o+m99NCfO0ws=SccvGBYJv07WVuF=eA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>
          <div>
            <div>Hello,<br>
              <br>
              This is primarily aimed at developers of SPV wallets.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            The recently reported decrease in number of full nodes could
            have several reasons, one of them that less people are
            running Bitcoin Core for the wallet because the other
            wallets are getting ahead in both features and useability.<br>
            <br>
            It's great to see innovation in wallets, but it's worrying
            that the number of full nodes decreases. <br>
            <br>
            It may be that lots of people would support the network by
            running a full node, but don't want to go through the
            trouble of installing bitcoin core separately (and get
            confused because it's a wallet, too).<br>
          </div>
          <div><br>
          </div>
          Hence I'd like to explore the idea of adding an option to
          popular SPV wallets, to spin a bitcoind process in the
          background. This could be pretty much transparent to the user
          - it would sync in the background, the wallet could show
          statistics about the node, but is not dependent on it.<br>
          <br>
          In exchange the user would get increased (full node level)
          security, as the SPV wallet would have a local trusted node.<br>
          <br>
        </div>
        <div>Does this sound like a good idea?<br>
        </div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        Is there any way that Bitcoin Core can help to accomedate this
        'embedded' usage? Specific Interfaces, special builds - maybe
        add a walletless bitcoind build to gitian - bindings, dlls, etc?<br>
        <div>
          <div>
            <div><br>
              Wladimir<br>
              <br>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Put Bad Developers to Shame
Dominate Development with Jenkins Continuous Integration
Continuously Automate Build, Test &amp; Deployment 
Start a new project now. Try Jenkins in the cloud.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://p.sf.net/sfu/13600_Cloudbees">http://p.sf.net/sfu/13600_Cloudbees</a></pre>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    I personally like the ida.&nbsp; Are you talking about a flag that could
    toggle this "in the background" mode or recoding for in the
    background use?<br>
    <br>
    <br>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
Kevin
</pre>
  </body>
</html>

--------------030901030209010306070109--