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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1XFj3Q-0004Dg-1K
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:13:52 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.218.47 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.218.47; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-oi0-f47.google.com;
Received: from mail-oi0-f47.google.com ([209.85.218.47])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1XFj3P-0007XU-4k
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:13:51 +0000
Received: by mail-oi0-f47.google.com with SMTP id x69so3577061oia.6
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 05:13:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.209.101 with SMTP id ml5mr30328702obc.2.1407500025649;
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 05:13:45 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.35.234 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Aug 2014 05:13:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAJHLa0MOn5XxAFzqDPgvM=jrr8PRx=Lkatpw30xZqiOQDaK52Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJHLa0Ok6s5xQcMSeLa69adLBXEaicuXqcg45eZrwYtVFbx-dA@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP2wYcxJhxRRa86Nm9ENtK2SA5VNG-L7f5pHb_W=Ajcj5Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+s+GJD+9qpwFcVfHOCCsFYjmk7A0V=65vG-7jJ6D7jj4Pi_7g@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP245242JYDBBo72XVmKgEBO96QPjcJi8Jy2Dm_r90n1Bw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJHLa0N3xx1QZ==iSLYNsdgkBGoqN34+4eVtukkjn+3SrDhC7A@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP1mhSodC-ZvkuVKAgHO44bM7QX=RivRDhnDeHOKr8PXqQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJHLa0MOn5XxAFzqDPgvM=jrr8PRx=Lkatpw30xZqiOQDaK52Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 14:13:45 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: R7cditG2TUToBkUdT1NreNZSi6s
Message-ID: <CANEZrP3ij79gNxHCYbvhJ15=UQZmWPTuUng9aC-nFN6Z28riPw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8ff1ca200ce05105001d231c
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
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
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
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: 1XFj3P-0007XU-4k
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] NODE_EXT_SERVICES and advertising related
services
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: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:13:52 -0000
--e89a8ff1ca200ce05105001d231c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Yes, that is the one change I am still pondering: adding categories
> (classes), rather than one single bit.
>
Sure, that makes more sense I think.
As a motivating use case, Bitcoin Wallet for Android currently has a
hard-coded block explorer (biteasy.com) which it uses to find UTXOs for a
given key. This is used for its "Sweep paper wallet" feature. It must work
this way because P2P nodes don't calculate such indexes.
If there was a way to do block index autodiscovery, that'd help us remove
this hard-coded block explorer and increase decentralisation. But because
it's a GUI app we don't want users to look at a spinner for more than a few
seconds, so a slow discovery process would make it unworkable. With
API-based categories of service bits we could implement such a scheme.
--e89a8ff1ca200ce05105001d231c
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left:1ex">Yes, that is the one change I am still pondering=
: =C2=A0adding categories<br>
(classes), rather than one single bit.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>=
Sure, that makes more sense I think.</div><div></div></div><br></div><div c=
lass=3D"gmail_extra">As a motivating use case, Bitcoin Wallet for Android c=
urrently has a hard-coded block explorer (<a href=3D"http://biteasy.com">bi=
teasy.com</a>) which it uses to find UTXOs for a given key. This is used fo=
r its "Sweep paper wallet" feature. It must work this way because=
P2P nodes don't calculate such indexes.</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">If there wa=
s a way to do block index autodiscovery, that'd help us remove this har=
d-coded block explorer and increase decentralisation. But because it's =
a GUI app we don't want users to look at a spinner for more than a few =
seconds, so a slow discovery process would make it unworkable. With API-bas=
ed categories of service bits we could implement such a scheme.</div>
</div>
--e89a8ff1ca200ce05105001d231c--
|
