From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WYCrt-0006EL-9Z for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:10:05 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.223.179 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.223.179; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com; helo=mail-ie0-f179.google.com; Received: from mail-ie0-f179.google.com ([209.85.223.179]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WYCrs-0006Jx-Jv for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:10:05 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f179.google.com with SMTP id lx4so3757642iec.38 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 04:09:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.43.151.134 with SMTP id ks6mr119498icc.85.1397128199326; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 04:09:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.70.131 with HTTP; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 04:09:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <0B038624-8861-438E-B7B1-566B4A8E126B@bitsofproof.com> References: <534570A2.9090502@gmx.de> <0B038624-8861-438E-B7B1-566B4A8E126B@bitsofproof.com> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 13:09:59 +0200 Message-ID: From: Wladimir To: Tamas Blummer Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2d30c06d38904f6ae42af X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) 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 (laanwj[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 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: 1WYCrs-0006Jx-Jv Cc: Bitcoin Dev 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: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:10:05 -0000 --001a11c2d30c06d38904f6ae42af Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 8:04 AM, Tamas Blummer wrote: > Serving headers should be default but storing and serving full blocks > configurable to ranges, so people can tailor to their bandwith and space > available. > I do agree that it is important. This does require changes to the P2P protocol, as currently there is no way for a node to signal that they store only part of the block chain. Also, clients will have to be modified to take this into account. Right now they are under the assumption that every full node can send them every (previous) block. What would this involve? Do you know of any previous work towards this? Wladimir --001a11c2d30c06d38904f6ae42af Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On T= hu, Apr 10, 2014 at 8:04 AM, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com&= gt; wrote:
Serving headers should be default but storing and serving f= ull blocks configurable to ranges, so people can tailor to their bandwith a= nd space available.

I do agree that it is important.

<= div>This does require changes to the P2P protocol, as currently there is no= way for a node to signal that they store only part of the block chain. Als= o, clients will have to be modified to take this into account. Right now th= ey are under the assumption that every full node can send them every (previ= ous) block.

What would this involve?

Do you= know of any previous work towards this?

Wladimir

--001a11c2d30c06d38904f6ae42af--