Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.223.169 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.223.169; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ie0-f169.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJBT9u+LMqTfrTwUQrGbnrqj2u==1kmx17uQyY8899O8sw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAC1+kJNjcPkaHiR8mzofwXE4+4UX5nmxX5Q3rZv37v-K40p1Tw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+s+GJDVBQVu8yH9jLu_rQmk=dsJuMUctT-iK0zzOJRYgE8k9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAC1+kJOQ2uBo2peYKZJyPSQL6qzk6Yu-cF-tPs3GzVS6cAc53w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+s+GJBT9u+LMqTfrTwUQrGbnrqj2u==1kmx17uQyY8899O8sw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 11:44:01 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+s+GJBsrV2mjotM9==1M8Cm8EjoQ4Oh0BN3cdUOARryy2VwAA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@monetize.io>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Plans to separate wallet from core
Precedence: list

> But IMO this is a passed stage. SPV wallets w/ Bloom filtering can
> work without any special servers, so why require a 'close binding' to
> a trusted bitcoin core?

To clarify (and not piss off ThomasV :-): I do not think the idea of
having servers with a reputation of their own is a passed stage. There
are many things that cannot be done at SPV level security with just
the P2P protocol yet. So having fewer but more trusted Electrum
servers is a reasonable compromise.

But for basic wallet functionality it isn't necessary.

Wladimir