On Thursday, August 7, 2025 at 8:24:11 AM UTC+9 Murch wrote:

Hello Calvin and all,

Thank you for sharing your drafts. I skimmed your proposals and found
them to be shaping up nicely. I didn’t notice anything worth conceptual
feedback at this time, but will have plenty comments later in the
process when they are more fitting. Obviously, utreexo has had a lot of
discussion in the past already and these proposals are fairly close to
the editorial requirements, so please feel free to open pull requests
for the proposals whenever you feel ready to do so.

Cheers,
Murch

On 2025-07-29 16:20, Calvin Kim wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Tadge Dryja, Davidson Souza, and I would like to propose 3 BIPs
> describing Utreexo, a consensus-compatible (non-soft fork) way to send
> and verify transactions without storing the full UTXO set.
>
> The 3 BIPs are for:
>
> 1. The specification of the Utreexo accumulator.
> 2. The specification of Bitcoin block and tx validation using the
> Utreexo accumulator.
> 3. The peer to peer networking changes required to enable Utreexo nodes.
>
>
> We are currently looking for conceptual review. Do note that the
> documents are not final, and they will be updated.
>
> All of the BIPs can be found here: https://github.com/utreexo/biptreexo
>
> We thank you in advance for your time and consideration.
>
> Best,
> Calvin
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/3452b63c-ff2b-4dd9-90ee-83fd9cedcf4an%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/3452b63c-ff2b-4dd9-90ee-83fd9cedcf4an%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.