From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC988D56 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2018 22:15:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-it0-f53.google.com (mail-it0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E9E5165 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2018 22:15:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f53.google.com with SMTP id t192-v6so6441446itc.1 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2018 15:15:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ezz6j8XcMcZ9SodNeUnv1St7iH9eDOAtF38b/WRzrgs=; b=oeVrE2GcNewyIVlnVo9Do7B92wfXizNRjdLGXsm95XDihtX5vKsYGLnxIsvrslSq77 CmnFWKQm3/3vh6oiVhOrrM8OouhiIyTYqKYFxjqJjZZc8BrNoYqctjtrIV2boNR2up65 mUQdrLL3E4AQB1u8B9LKftLa3xYSXenD/KOy/4oT/pzPnNgUMYw+THlAO5+3lqT7p72O QZyiFhAd2dfql+HHpuk0JbAtBE696xSJNit65obdIK3qp5Tp7clPuLZpBfEm3QyEqPWm TZ8XNk9SaIlZ3N8Us1zH68xA4gOLN5c3pO+6r2x0HXydstD9GIXxVfquTw1ryXTe+2dE NHDw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ezz6j8XcMcZ9SodNeUnv1St7iH9eDOAtF38b/WRzrgs=; b=Lofm3fMKY/ghGyG0XOxYRdPAGD7HV11NvDQtA/mIka0XhpUnxm6NsKjO/o5iTVAKww rraHd3sFhIlz/b0qVbOZU1FuiipZ17tNMsa/8D4KJppbHoidFRCubujqCnJEP0Hvi1WC fW8mikuinaCgdbxtwPWKymmR4xOPOhGcnfNjvoFTEChSzMEgz3GVZvk+farDaqK5S+5j 5QK66J6iP5xWeacHvFs80EfJdys2KlA75A0GpYt6/I526NiQ0OqHNCI8K2lGSeex9YW3 iKvXzzdumOfzjrLo6+IXaqGoKGnIkoqorbJbJJ610nzGS5cXIgIlrBA0kWEeXWJnj99h 9EJw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tBy60cloeCDT7+Q4MoI/pD0leiuCh0y5Cb1Ngicy1GOWc2fOwop QVlA4lNlDGl2Mo1zNFmyaaEyHSgHbcKc5NkMslIYCw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4/WVC7S3BVizYzSHSawbfsIP3ieYsYrmZQsKXlQHeyTmLpWGKsTgus7UzJvO0dZISlJ42XIiJqE+XpgwmNk658= X-Received: by 2002:a24:5b06:: with SMTP id g6-v6mr7145756itb.43.1523657750511; Fri, 13 Apr 2018 15:15:50 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.52.80 with HTTP; Fri, 13 Apr 2018 15:15:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4A0CD31A-8745-4425-99FC-5DF12FA3B917@jonasschnelli.ch> References: <4A0CD31A-8745-4425-99FC-5DF12FA3B917@jonasschnelli.ch> From: Jim Posen Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2018 15:15:50 -0700 Message-ID: To: Andreas Schildbach Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fa856f0569c236db" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW 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: Fri, 13 Apr 2018 22:16:39 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BloomFilter issue with segwit addresses X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2018 22:15:51 -0000 --000000000000fa856f0569c236db Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Why not add the outpoints owned by the wallet to the filter and watch for those instead of elements in the input script or witness data? On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 12:12 PM, Jonas Schnelli via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Hi Andreas > > Thanks for bringing this up and this seems indeed to be suboptimal. > > > I wonder if Bitcoin Core would be willing to extend the BIP37 matching > > rules such that data elements in the witness are also matched against? > > Bitcoin Core is not an identity that can be =E2=80=9Ewilling to extend=E2= =80=9C (or > reject) a feature. > Someone needs to come up with a proposal (pull request). > > Maybe an extension for BIP37 would make sense (*meh*). > Just inserting the witness data into the bloom filter seems to be an easy > solution (CBloomFilter::IsRelevantAndUpdate()) > > /jonas > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > --000000000000fa856f0569c236db Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Why not add the outpoints owned by the wallet to the filte= r and watch for those instead of elements in the input script or witness da= ta?

On Fri, = Apr 13, 2018 at 12:12 PM, Jonas Schnelli via bitcoin-dev = <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
Hi Andreas

Thanks for bringing this up and this seems indeed to be suboptimal.

> I wonder if Bitcoin Core would be willing to extend the BIP37 matching=
> rules such that data elements in the witness are also matched against?=

Bitcoin Core is not an identity that can be =E2=80=9Ewilling to exte= nd=E2=80=9C (or reject) a feature.
Someone needs to come up with a proposal (pull request).

Maybe an extension for BIP37 would make sense (*meh*).
Just inserting the witness data into the bloom filter seems to be an easy s= olution (CBloomFilter::IsRelevantAndUpdate())

/jonas

_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.= linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org= /mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


--000000000000fa856f0569c236db--