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 6D0B98A1 for ; Sat, 1 Apr 2017 23:38:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from cock.li (cock.li [185.100.85.212]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7976890 for ; Sat, 1 Apr 2017 23:38:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cock.lu; s=mail; t=1491089926; bh=JoQIw8EEkzficH0WXY9SMASZJqWlH1aPbdOM3ABATvY=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=cZ+wRMSWmeY6QztpCksdp2k0ft0CiYnDtDWLQloTT84PoLmUtcTgrdrTj74VRNA8F m422j0jmYxNWA3makae8A5o4yFUe5yJ1Q/f4Odi+LbVuk3eBLwftFPt5rQfpbgT2NH zaCyCijDmPheW62+NNWeJzGq4mTDmkA+8j/aNTNW9m8ElmtYqU1YFTaa+xi2k7Lxbv YPW/h3UTeVG8zIzVAg739avkDtnUW2XkGa+b5KgnGyPSs1hNiOZ8W2gsYaBJxoqe1h Pmb2SEBeFn5flvFtQJehRIlWn3/iAJmcCocJ1x2Y7wIUCyZNk0hUNzJj7prrwnI8Up wpvp6yGsXdmqA== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2017 09:38:45 +1000 From: bfd@cock.lu To: praxeology_guy , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: X-Sender: bfd@cock.lu User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.2.3 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 01 Apr 2017 23:41:18 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Guessing the spentness status of the pruned relatives 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: Sat, 01 Apr 2017 23:38:50 -0000 If a wallet is unaware of spends of its own coins (ie, transactions were made it can't have known about), there's probably bigger problems going on. You might enjoy the topic on this mailing list on committed bloom filters however, as this solves a similar issue without needing an ever-growing list of hundreds of millions of spent outputs. On 2017-04-02 06:04, praxeology_guy via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Bitcoin nodes could also keep a spentness status list, where each bit > in the spentness status list corresponds to whether a txo in the MMR > is spent. This could make it so that disconnected wallets didn't have > to guess the pruned relative spentness status when it reconnects to > the network... and help prevent DoS attacks.