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
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
|
Return-Path: <naumenko.gs@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2682BC87
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 4 Apr 2018 04:54:27 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pl0-f49.google.com (mail-pl0-f49.google.com
[209.85.160.49])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D09F14F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 4 Apr 2018 04:54:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pl0-f49.google.com with SMTP id bj1-v6so9972300plb.8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 03 Apr 2018 21:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version;
bh=PwH5+XH6lV7EiwRiHcOPm/XjpbfKjr7B7vR1mjx7ock=;
b=um3+D9LtSCXd3IBwhmD+aUa2y5YtL3EUZ8K5JiFvuuQhzmZGtC9bELDztAdsb3mYM7
HSCcOL3u2DAWEm0bv+RLfR8+Cz/hFtTVajE6MK6O3HF380Iu6FQSN9zm1bQSug4hso/O
by61xtJ68LPSfX7k1vOvxsiUjYbl8yKPxQUpMNJl/PVh7CEcKKpm0NIJMz0HoN78Yylb
n/NmEdeVlzrwZLpTEt2ah3xvG6PxNbia/FOiWNgJv8QaCM7ynFfDedk3PiFu00hevjAz
4NpkKil47vq1RDRI7OUiDyS2A69DJSkxstaGssuCgQAOoIgG9a8XfdRBBuJivfS7m4y8
EgoA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references
:subject:mime-version;
bh=PwH5+XH6lV7EiwRiHcOPm/XjpbfKjr7B7vR1mjx7ock=;
b=V0xXbssxq2P9wadp/QzpQOH0t9hYVxlzP/alz0FqyKdR0am+O4snKStHj64YxJ/9Ir
vNjC7Cam84h4E0AcRUP+X8N4UvzRxqV1quKbeZJ8hIYNdUNMpEKli5Z1udP2LXhzqrLc
09/7FDtmb+03GK06otqUAyoL3B+VzdElJ8OUJfLmlS3h7pSmHz1TRD8PVqBqLy/Ee5GV
4RK/U6rw7FscdZUkZEa+RSRptmFlzo/U+rrXp9ByZ/ps/sfL+lSv4RT0GwGUFRPaMKmP
PDWWxWj8RkhLO77jEPZfqrRGCaNJ1g3e6Rs5dXzY6TmI9tM0Z9YO/yLA1vTcJ3Ts/DCY
wOqQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7EYlrCm08PRuATS51IbjjGUbjbzJRcWwU2+ZLWY/EgG4q9cX+SL
3DhfmMefJ1Hc80mbwjJ3UHnS2R5u
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4/MLhI+HWawCROmFb21iRBmF7Oh5uW6BJtBfQvq/E2BqxKXLNtKYyfQ0xAoRmNIFHpnJxztkw==
X-Received: by 10.99.169.1 with SMTP id u1mr11270744pge.251.1522817665179;
Tue, 03 Apr 2018 21:54:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.128.3.157] ([209.58.139.34])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
h2sm8839633pfd.119.2018.04.03.21.54.22
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Tue, 03 Apr 2018 21:54:23 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 21:55:45 -0700
From: Gleb Naumenko <naumenko.gs@gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <cdd7a34f-3cd5-4747-a3a1-3106d66c1928@Spark>
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgSYG+jrLM4=DXVpLTh9diMEbX0gWG-wC0-2gBRio+Lo0Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9ab6e32e-db51-4ce4-8f3c-3a77f7b1f9bd@Spark>
<CAAS2fgSYG+jrLM4=DXVpLTh9diMEbX0gWG-wC0-2gBRio+Lo0Q@mail.gmail.com>
X-Readdle-Message-ID: cdd7a34f-3cd5-4747-a3a1-3106d66c1928@Spark
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="5ac45ae0_440badfc_7d7e"
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: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 13:02:00 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Low-bandwidth transaction relay
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: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 04:54:27 -0000
--5ac45ae0_440badfc_7d7e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Thanks for the links=21
Blocksonly is definitely a relevant piece. However, I=E2=80=99m wondering=
what are the implications, especially at larger scale. =46or example, tr=
ansactions processing will be not smooth anymore and will happen every 10=
minutes at once. Another question is transaction propagation.
I think what I=E2=80=99ve proposed does not have those implications. Well=
, propagation is still a concern, but it=E2=80=99s not that extreme. One =
weakness of my idea is relative complexity comparing to blocksonly.
Another variation of the idea I described might work without INVs at all =
=C2=A0(then N=3D1 and transactions are relayed through 1 link only, durin=
g the time between blocks) and it would have the same security assumption=
s as blocksonly.
Your IBLT and BCH-sets proposals sound very promising. I had something li=
ke that on mind, but I decided to start with a more conservative protocol=
.
It looks like sync-relay idea has a lot of interesting questions, I=E2=80=
=99m excited to follow that research.
On Apr 3, 2018, 12:04 PM -0700, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell=40gmail.com>, w=
rote:
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 10:18 PM, Gleb Naumenko via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev=40lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I have a couple of ideas regarding transaction relay protocol and wan=
ted to
> > share it with and probably get some feedback.
>
>
>
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php=3Ftopic=3D1377345.0
>
> https://people.xiph.org/=7Egreg/mempool=5Fsync=5Frelay.txt
--5ac45ae0_440badfc_7d7e
Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
<html xmlns=3D=22http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml=22>
<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
<div name=3D=22messageBodySection=22 style=3D=22font-size: 14px; font-fam=
ily: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystem=46ont, sans-serif;=22>
<div>Thanks for the links=21&=23160;</div>
<div><br /></div>
<div>Blocksonly is definitely a relevant piece. However, I=E2=80=99m wond=
ering what are the implications, especially at larger scale. =46or exampl=
e, transactions processing will be not smooth anymore and will happen eve=
ry 10 minutes at once. Another question is transaction propagation.</div>=
<div><br /></div>
<div>I think what I=E2=80=99ve proposed does not have those implications.=
Well, propagation is still a concern, but it=E2=80=99s not that extreme.=
One weakness of my idea is relative complexity comparing to blocksonly.<=
/div>
<div><br /></div>
<div>Another variation of the idea I described might work without INVs at=
all &=23160;(then N=3D1 and transactions are relayed through 1 link only=
, during the time between blocks) and it would have the same security ass=
umptions as blocksonly.</div>
<div><br /></div>
<div>Your IBLT and BCH-sets proposals sound very promising. I had somethi=
ng like that on mind, but I decided to start with a more conservative pro=
tocol.</div>
<div>It looks like sync-relay idea has a lot of interesting questions, I=E2=
=80=99m excited to follow that research.</div>
</div>
<div name=3D=22messageReplySection=22 style=3D=22font-size: 14px; font-fa=
mily: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystem=46ont, sans-serif;=22><br />
On Apr 3, 2018, 12:04 PM -0700, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell=40gmail.com&=
gt;, wrote:<br />
<blockquote type=3D=22cite=22 style=3D=22margin: 5px 5px; padding-left: 1=
0px; border-left: thin solid =231abc9c;=22>On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 10:18 P=
M, Gleb Naumenko via bitcoin-dev<br />
<bitcoin-dev=40lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:<br />
<blockquote type=3D=22cite=22 style=3D=22margin: 5px 5px; padding-left: 1=
0px; border-left: thin solid =23e67e22;=22>Hi all,<br />
I have a couple of ideas regarding transaction relay protocol and wanted =
to<br />
share it with and probably get some feedback.<br /></blockquote>
<br />
<br />
<br />
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php=3Ftopic=3D1377345.0<br />
<br />
https://people.xiph.org/=7Egreg/mempool=5Fsync=5Frelay.txt<br /></blockqu=
ote>
<div></div>
</div>
</body>
</html>
--5ac45ae0_440badfc_7d7e--
|
