From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivery-date: Wed, 28 May 2025 08:32:50 -0700 Received: from mail-yw1-f190.google.com ([209.85.128.190]) by mail.fairlystable.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uKIls-0007NG-TB for bitcoindev@gnusha.org; Wed, 28 May 2025 08:32:50 -0700 Received: by mail-yw1-f190.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-70e43123ec6sf42423167b3.3 for ; Wed, 28 May 2025 08:32:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20230601; t=1748446363; x=1749051163; darn=gnusha.org; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-sender:mime-version :subject:references:in-reply-to:message-id:to:from:date:sender:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Ia/ssTf6gfYTSrxmm1VA6zTEXKyBHbTeS/C3BEjMTLI=; b=hWS+7sd/ytM6M8izsmSl8nPqpe6Uy1gnBbWCPZB8QX1vO41tQhdkaD6dbJw/t7EjWS eioovyd9hw26aULs/q1URhK4pUphGyeqhsVn1OviTxMKNWqXK4BPQzctsrNM0vMh0u14 pPtRXG0BYEmgmB/a8wwvVWc25ttEH0/8ujhK0rO+nfaiRgNNaqFqKqOqXDwiAoQaHtIX vJo91eQUMMz+XAJpngDcB/wgzaULW5gIj5ee5HDkc5og+LM2YHOSt5Nee6X/iFf3dkrl XAgaWfNppcsFTIgjnYP+UhzWcpyBxm/LsmOBqMy6M23pVgWvZYMwN9LuMhh/TvNnO4Tm tN8g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1748446363; x=1749051163; darn=gnusha.org; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-sender:mime-version :subject:references:in-reply-to:message-id:to:from:date:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Ia/ssTf6gfYTSrxmm1VA6zTEXKyBHbTeS/C3BEjMTLI=; b=DcwdTHt51Ib1wZBoO64BwrO/See+nN/Fp/L/3o1Y8BFpJRp9AaeKWPM0NRGVmJPHv5 Ya/ETaagtxMNmMbaum7EVL+/k6yc0mo0Y0e1PLGdqUuDwWP8C1Egw8I7kAQgo5/0eWDf Mbxx1CIUW5GkRx4ix17Ww7CI8xnraCqeDdmQk/S2oO23yEZ3kFrWRGeMJHRVPsRsPQV3 6GH4O9QvhsL3TzC56TdAQjr/H8aiK0Trlnu5zbJJEbUQuR1ur47QO7FT61bAXCIvi0AA N+V2X6Dx+bbJgdT+OM4xrY+LBMOE96r+rgNhOUh7PKdaR1vA3w1ztonImeVy4nbpjPfV j5NQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1748446363; x=1749051163; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-sender:mime-version :subject:references:in-reply-to:message-id:to:from:date:x-beenthere :x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=Ia/ssTf6gfYTSrxmm1VA6zTEXKyBHbTeS/C3BEjMTLI=; b=iVoflhqI9jo6xHzl3KMRoiJDwQLWy79VpvFC1kxxXG+SQ+dX9fkJCuD7HiTbcLsrnD O5fydSw5CcSKui7ldCki90XNzmws4TZOxzOla7zLmRjbBVVLTzhSJZM9Y4X3Ey9FLtXp xXRvpMHq6JfpLjTxVntsl6F5jw0bK9UMb+8rRqnrmP1U8MPCoORbd0+K8igCSqAzzTJf W2ZQnx05xyBKHhUFvpLMJd4BTCF/Nh2AkSL96YF/fcMfT+Fdaaj8egxdDgsHejG3w0Bp 6AV6dBE2AuWLC72DB15yFcmrdwvG69F9HWCa4S1QCKLneJQ3PAF8wFyWlUFxfNhGIRzb ocsQ== Sender: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCV2kMvEnH+Rw3leuWoI9d4Wb3KMCMk5VL05E4ZeSLhfzJeSCNp6gT3kokden00ct35R6ew7avAkeSoz@gnusha.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyrhF1SMY9WbcOUzreRNR/h26LqjdS+mZdQcHZ3seJvfgiAI0Ie OQANz24epXxplhbgRcPUodt2IlvI2UQc6oGpw6BAqfVGUlt6hjK/Ha3C X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEcsJCWsVxa2cN1on83pUNrfH9b0YL9g3cxqAaR8ts3pIrUcj4R4rpfGmXMkDheFK/h2z21yA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:726:b0:e7d:cf7b:6840 with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-e7dcf7b7118mr7169580276.6.1748446363051; Wed, 28 May 2025 08:32:43 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; h=AZMbMZfMBPrrQ0VjfeRyHRZ331NB18MUNtZHe25XlqdVRML3EQ== Received: by 2002:a25:d84c:0:b0:e7d:c4d4:b14b with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-e7dc4d4b336ls608608276.0.-pod-prod-09-us; Wed, 28 May 2025 08:32:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:690c:c02:b0:70e:2d17:84b3 with SMTP id 00721157ae682-70e2db268bemr224516267b3.37.1748446358357; Wed, 28 May 2025 08:32:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 2002:a81:d404:0:b0:70d:e0e5:164f with SMTP id 00721157ae682-70de0e51791ms7b3; Wed, 28 May 2025 06:16:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:690c:7246:b0:70e:1ef7:6eff with SMTP id 00721157ae682-70e2d982866mr221592847b3.3.1748438181384; Wed, 28 May 2025 06:16:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 06:16:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Greg Sanders To: Bitcoin Development Mailing List Message-Id: <2a40a751-d0d1-4dc8-9dd5-67b7652ed8b8n@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] Proposal to solve the spam war: configurable data blob relay policy MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_388370_2009729009.1748438180836" X-Original-Sender: gsanders87@gmail.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; contact bitcoindev+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 786775582512 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) ------=_Part_388370_2009729009.1748438180836 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_388371_2098384173.1748438180836" ------=_Part_388371_2098384173.1748438180836 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > If we need two networks, one for stuff like what Citrea is doing and the= =20 other for finance with a technological fence around it, I'm all for it. Has= =20 Citrea heard of nostr? Citrea, like Lightning, is relying on Bitcoin's proof of publication to=20 ultimately move bitcoin. Moving the data elsewhere would change the L2's=20 security model drastically. Greg On Tuesday, May 27, 2025 at 7:15:06=E2=80=AFPM UTC-4 Dave Scotese wrote: > As far as I can tell, the resource being wasted is the bandwidth of those= =20 > who are (currently kind enough to be) maintaining the network. They are= =20 > giving away that bandwidth for free, and I think they ought to be=20 > compensated for it, but until enough of it is "wasted", the demand for su= ch=20 > compensation will remain too low for that problem to be solved. Everyone= =20 > who broadcasts a transaction offers the miners the chance to earn a fee,= =20 > and those miners seem to me to be the only ones with the right incentive = to=20 > solve the problem (because if it gets bad enough, they don't get valuable= =20 > bitcoin transactions to mine quickly enough). I believe that in time,=20 > miners will develop a way of privately compensating transaction relayers= =20 > for this reason. I would very much enjoy seeing the propagation of data= =20 > grow as a market on its own in which nerds like me could participate simp= ly=20 > by leaving their internet-connected machines on all the time and=20 > maintaining the software that runs it. > > Protecting Bitcoin from becoming that market and perhaps crowding out its= =20 > financial utility might not be such a good idea, but distributing Bitcoin= =20 > technology has vastly lowered the cost of financial transactions for=20 > everyone. If we need two networks, one for stuff like what Citrea is doin= g=20 > and the other for finance with a technological fence around it, I'm all f= or=20 > it. Has Citrea heard of nostr? > > Dave Scotese > > On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 10:18=E2=80=AFAM Jonathan Voss = wrote: > >> My understanding is that Citrea is using a ZKP proof to recover from an= =20 >> invalid protocol state. Whatever data gets into the blockchain, the onus= is=20 >> on the Citrea-compatible nodes to do the actual validation -- Bitcoin=20 >> itself has no part in this other than distributing the data. Adding a ne= w=20 >> relay service for promulgating data that is provably committed to in an= =20 >> OP_RETURN would not be a significant additional burden to the L2 protoco= l=20 >> if this additional relay service is adopted by a sufficient proportion o= f=20 >> nodes, and L2 protocol participants would have an incentive to run this = new=20 >> relay service for their own benefit, so they would likely already have t= he=20 >> data cached by the time the transaction is confirmed. I don't have any h= ard=20 >> numbers on this, but my conjecture is that L2 protocols would run enough= =20 >> relays themselves for the system to be viable, and the clear segregation= =20 >> between arbitrary data ephemerally cached and monetary data permanently= =20 >> stored will be enough incentive for many node operators to also adopt it= . >> >> On Tuesday, May 27, 2025 at 12:05:51=E2=80=AFPM UTC-4 Russell O'Connor w= rote: >> >>> On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 5:33=E2=80=AFPM Jonathan Voss wrote: >>> >>>> However, the recent discussion premised upon Citrea's Clementine Bridg= e=20 >>>> evidences primarily that the relaying capabilities of the Bitcoin netw= ork=20 >>>> itself are sufficiently useful for L2 designers that there is an incen= tive=20 >>>> to bypass standardness restrictions for the sake of reliably promulgat= ing=20 >>>> data -- at least in the case of Citrea, they say they need to quickly = and=20 >>>> widely disseminate 140+ bytes of arbitrary ZKP data to recover from an= =20 >>>> invalid protocol state, and the utility of that ZKP data very quickly= =20 >>>> decreases after it has been confirmed and processed. >>> >>> >>> Does your proposal actually solve this problem? Posting the 140 bytes= =20 >>> of data to the blockchain works as a public bulletin board because the= =20 >>> actual data within the block is what is ultimately guaranteed to be=20 >>> disseminated to all participants. With your proposal, a transaction wi= th=20 >>> an OP_RETURN containing a hash of data could end up being mined without= the=20 >>> relevant transaction ever even being relayed through the Bitcoin networ= k. >>> >>> --=20 >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group= s=20 >> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send a= n=20 >> email to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion visit=20 >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/a484ae6a-33d6-4704-8356-c0e= d1e5ae376n%40googlegroups.com=20 >> >> . >> > > > --=20 > I own Litmocracy and Meme Racing=20 > (in alpha).=20 > I'm the webmaster for The Voluntaryist =20 > which now accepts Bitcoin. > "He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules" - Satoshi=20 > Nakamoto > --=20 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 e= mail to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/= 2a40a751-d0d1-4dc8-9dd5-67b7652ed8b8n%40googlegroups.com. ------=_Part_388371_2098384173.1748438180836 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > If we need two networks, one for stuff like what Citrea is doing and t= he other for finance with a technological fence around it, I'm all for it. = Has Citrea heard of nostr?

Citrea, like Lightning, is = relying on Bitcoin's proof of publication to ultimately move bitcoin. Movin= g the data elsewhere would change the L2's security model drastically.

Greg

On Tuesday, May 27, 2025 at 7:15:06=E2= =80=AFPM UTC-4 Dave Scotese wrote:
As far as I can tell, the resource b= eing wasted is the bandwidth of those who are (currently kind enough=C2=A0t= o be) maintaining the network. They are giving away that bandwidth for free= , and I think they ought to be compensated for it, but until enough of it i= s "wasted", the demand for such compensation will remain too low = for that problem to be solved. Everyone who broadcasts a transaction offers= the miners the chance to earn a fee, and those miners seem to me to be the= only ones with the right incentive to solve the problem (because if it get= s bad enough, they don't get valuable bitcoin transactions to mine quic= kly enough). I believe that in time, miners will develop=C2=A0a way of priv= ately compensating transaction relayers for this reason. I would very much = enjoy seeing the propagation of data grow as a market on its own in which n= erds like me could participate simply by leaving their internet-connected m= achines on all the time and maintaining the software that runs it.

=
Protecting Bitcoin from becoming that market and perhaps crowdin= g out its financial utility might not be such a good idea, but distributing= Bitcoin technology has vastly lowered the cost of financial transactions f= or everyone. If we need two networks, one for stuff like what Citrea is doi= ng and the other for finance with a technological fence around it, I'm = all for it. Has Citrea heard of nostr?

Dave Scotes= e

On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 10:18=E2=80= =AFAM Jonathan Voss <k98...@g= mail.com> wrote:
My understanding is that Citrea is= using a ZKP proof to recover from an invalid protocol state. Whatever data= gets into the blockchain, the onus is on the Citrea-compatible nodes to do= the actual validation -- Bitcoin itself has no part in this other than dis= tributing the data. Adding a new relay service for promulgating data that i= s provably committed to in an OP_RETURN would not be a significant addition= al burden to the L2 protocol if this additional relay service is adopted by= a sufficient proportion of nodes, and L2 protocol participants would have = an incentive to run this new relay service for their own benefit, so they w= ould likely already have the data cached by the time the transaction is con= firmed. I don't have any hard numbers on this, but my conjecture is tha= t L2 protocols would run enough relays themselves for the system to be viab= le, and the clear segregation between arbitrary data ephemerally cached and= monetary data permanently stored will be enough incentive for many node op= erators to also adopt it.

On Tuesday, May 27, 2025 at 12:05:51=E2=80=AFPM UTC= -4 Russell O'Connor wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 5:33=E2=80= =AFPM Jonathan Voss <k98...@gmail.com> wrote:=
However, the re= cent discussion premised upon Citrea's Clementine Bridge evidences prim= arily that the relaying capabilities of the Bitcoin network itself are suff= iciently useful for L2 designers that there is an incentive to bypass stand= ardness restrictions for the sake of reliably promulgating data -- at least= in the case of Citrea, they say they need to quickly and widely disseminat= e 140+ bytes of arbitrary ZKP data to recover from an invalid protocol stat= e, and the utility of that ZKP data very quickly decreases after it has bee= n confirmed and processed.

Does your proposa= l actually solve this problem?=C2=A0 Posting the 140 bytes of data to the b= lockchain works as a public bulletin board because the actual data within t= he block is what is ultimately guaranteed to be disseminated to all partici= pants.=C2=A0 With your proposal, a transaction with an OP_RETURN containing= a hash of data could end up being mined without the relevant transaction e= ver even being relayed through the Bitcoin network.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bitcoindev+...@googlegro= ups.com.
To view this discussion visit https= ://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/a484ae6a-33d6-4704-8356-c0ed1e5ae37= 6n%40googlegroups.com.


--
I own Litmocracy = and Meme Racing (in alpha).
I'm th= e webmaster for The Voluntaryist which n= ow accepts Bitcoin.
"He ought to find it more profitable to play by= the rules" - Satoshi Nakamoto

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bitcoind= ev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoind= ev/2a40a751-d0d1-4dc8-9dd5-67b7652ed8b8n%40googlegroups.com.
------=_Part_388371_2098384173.1748438180836-- ------=_Part_388370_2009729009.1748438180836--