From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WXxLc-0006B7-Pp for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 09 Apr 2014 18:35:44 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.192.49 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.192.49; envelope-from=kevinsisco61784@gmail.com; helo=mail-qg0-f49.google.com; Received: from mail-qg0-f49.google.com ([209.85.192.49]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WXxLb-0000Xr-Jf for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 09 Apr 2014 18:35:44 +0000 Received: by mail-qg0-f49.google.com with SMTP id j107so596667qga.8 for ; Wed, 09 Apr 2014 11:35:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.140.34.46 with SMTP id k43mr14040069qgk.63.1397068538126; Wed, 09 Apr 2014 11:35:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.115] (ool-457b2cb7.dyn.optonline.net. [69.123.44.183]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id u59sm2017371qga.8.2014.04.09.11.35.36 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 09 Apr 2014 11:35:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <534592F5.2000407@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 14:35:33 -0400 From: Kevin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030901030209010306070109" X-Spam-Score: -0.3 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [209.85.192.49 listed in list.dnswl.org] -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 (kevinsisco61784[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in digit (kevinsisco61784[at]gmail.com) 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 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: 1WXxLb-0000Xr-Jf Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoind-in-background mode for SPV wallets X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 18:35:45 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030901030209010306070109 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 4/9/2014 11:29 AM, Wladimir wrote: > Hello, > > This is primarily aimed at developers of SPV wallets. > > The recently reported decrease in number of full nodes could have > several reasons, one of them that less people are running Bitcoin Core > for the wallet because the other wallets are getting ahead in both > features and useability. > > It's great to see innovation in wallets, but it's worrying that the > number of full nodes decreases. > > It may be that lots of people would support the network by running a > full node, but don't want to go through the trouble of installing > bitcoin core separately (and get confused because it's a wallet, too). > > Hence I'd like to explore the idea of adding an option to popular SPV > wallets, to spin a bitcoind process in the background. This could be > pretty much transparent to the user - it would sync in the background, > the wallet could show statistics about the node, but is not dependent > on it. > > In exchange the user would get increased (full node level) security, > as the SPV wallet would have a local trusted node. > > Does this sound like a good idea? > > Is there any way that Bitcoin Core can help to accomedate this > 'embedded' usage? Specific Interfaces, special builds - maybe add a > walletless bitcoind build to gitian - bindings, dlls, etc? > > Wladimir > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Put Bad Developers to Shame > Dominate Development with Jenkins Continuous Integration > Continuously Automate Build, Test & Deployment > Start a new project now. Try Jenkins in the cloud. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/13600_Cloudbees > > > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development I personally like the ida. Are you talking about a flag that could toggle this "in the background" mode or recoding for in the background use? -- Kevin --------------030901030209010306070109 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 4/9/2014 11:29 AM, Wladimir wrote:
Hello,

This is primarily aimed at developers of SPV wallets.

The recently reported decrease in number of full nodes could have several reasons, one of them that less people are running Bitcoin Core for the wallet because the other wallets are getting ahead in both features and useability.

It's great to see innovation in wallets, but it's worrying that the number of full nodes decreases.

It may be that lots of people would support the network by running a full node, but don't want to go through the trouble of installing bitcoin core separately (and get confused because it's a wallet, too).

Hence I'd like to explore the idea of adding an option to popular SPV wallets, to spin a bitcoind process in the background. This could be pretty much transparent to the user - it would sync in the background, the wallet could show statistics about the node, but is not dependent on it.

In exchange the user would get increased (full node level) security, as the SPV wallet would have a local trusted node.

Does this sound like a good idea?

Is there any way that Bitcoin Core can help to accomedate this 'embedded' usage? Specific Interfaces, special builds - maybe add a walletless bitcoind build to gitian - bindings, dlls, etc?

Wladimir



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Put Bad Developers to Shame
Dominate Development with Jenkins Continuous Integration
Continuously Automate Build, Test & Deployment 
Start a new project now. Try Jenkins in the cloud.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/13600_Cloudbees


_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
I personally like the ida.  Are you talking about a flag that could toggle this "in the background" mode or recoding for in the background use?


-- 
Kevin
--------------030901030209010306070109--