Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DA28C002D for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 12:07:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59F154052C for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 12:07:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 59F154052C Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm1 header.b=MwhBIPqv X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.602 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dkCYxthwzFKU for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 12:07:40 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org D6D9040124 Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6D9040124 for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 12:07:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF36A3200AB0; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 07:07:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 09 Nov 2022 07:07:36 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; t=1667995655; x=1668082055; bh=gD1NarEfaBOnohmfJuh1ml9CGAyU AjB0BELEWwFkgiQ=; b=MwhBIPqvaEDyuTVbRVZAuECDp5oZfTo42vzXXUpcWdke Z0VfFJvEAqrWf3PmvgbdEPh9Arh08+dfpkacQvys4SdlhemoQBLHjrC7ABrhm/GW 2hR36rKu9h46HyOpXtdL4twotKgeEUkV8+P4ChUvoRXcjIzWBrqwQVJPeD/n9Uxv oBj/57x6uBk8qzLXS/fgPxD7PzFuusQNjXvj8pPhBZK155rbijoNbzdPZ/cSuh+e 6Tuq5DcdD4TFhAccvql+Q7Z/IL3lXn1GB8xMn96L8HWaoQr2hAuC5DJ1FKw+V4Tg /jGzc/a/VaCK2orRdNhEpshm+qbFpcBHygIP4O146Q== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvgedrfedvgdefhecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehgtderredttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefrvghtvghr ucfvohguugcuoehpvghtvgesphgvthgvrhhtohguugdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvg hrnhepledvleelffdtudekudffjefgfeejueehieelfedtgfetudetgeegveeutefhjedt necuffhomhgrihhnpehpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphgvthgvsehpvghtvghrthhouggurdho rhhg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 07:07:35 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6CF895F81E; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 07:07:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2022 07:07:33 -0500 From: Peter Todd To: Bram Cohen , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="qchFOnzSVchGVHrj" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Merkleize All The Things X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2022 12:07:41 -0000 --qchFOnzSVchGVHrj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 03:34:32PM -0800, Bram Cohen via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Another probably unhelpful bit of feedback I have is that Bitcoin should > probably be taking verkle trees seriously because those can have > substantially lower size/cost/weight than merkle trees. That doesn't just > apply to this proposal, but to Bitcoin in general, which doesn't seem to > have any serious verkle tree proposals to date. Verkle trees only reduce proof sizes by a factor of 6-8, and they introduce significant implementation complexity and new cryptographic assumptions. Be= tter to let other crypto-systems get a few more years of experience with them be= fore adding them to Bitcoin. Particularly since even having merkle trees in Bitc= oin is arguably a mistake: they allow for degenerate, weak, security modes like= SPV that aren't clearly good for Bitcoin as a whole. --=20 https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org --qchFOnzSVchGVHrj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE0RcYcKRzsEwFZ3N5Lly11TVRLzcFAmNrmAIACgkQLly11TVR LzeqDhAAp6Ro+toXBaC6xQnEdXAcAB4Rsi721eA1v7iaHzvHW6DxoJKiJKrynqt9 xxg+F2MkAtbR7QBD2Bp/eMRgR6w5POoG9QdJ7v6aqz1/h+kwoa+E9nADbVDTZpdz Z/k02QQ9uRaxQ5A5BCyx8pAJW2TLsAXrq9KkhT+nqXr2q9BJvZI6Chl42do06WtM KpA0CvAxWa9/82Xmv4jLWlNdF27GkZVVVUyPVoZ86ckkQV8dO07Z6ibdsXoSYNvg jkH1fdk+3Bsz9VhT8KkLPQ555lWmFX+VnCvGInqInsVNnGH9Szu2aFziwkp782i8 vROQVT+C3XhKnq7PUIo/rge8hHejxfBptoU5YOzWqV2nNVUsZ8IQZ8jmA+xFuWmw TQeI2DfFWcHD0eiulgNnkEjvQhw0nX9HM3rTRue8LkADBwQYpvc1RgrMYimlrFQm xEwewVXUSXSGiJE8Q/we7EiMdNFwHJAk8nxT1ZGfod8xwfDNvpbmGUsDJx8Qb1GC jEDnn8prcGlK4vGtzIwXIGAxSqATwcgmb4Mo7fPWXu46jBoke/uastIOw8uRLPNX WHT/itGH+cdh9M4s5nPHG2+PMNCcwlM+1PeNlGray56EicBiM3FvNOwmqAmGCORq ii9SVp5SOQmpC8SRpQffX0gNANdQYq9js5moyGYMGK8A20CfmqE= =qlB8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --qchFOnzSVchGVHrj--