> I completed a whitepaper for Bitcoin a proof-of-stake version which uses a
> single nomadic verifiable mint agent and distributed replication of a
> single blockchain by compensated full nodes to achieve 6-hop, sub-second
> transaction acknowledgement times. Plus it pays dividends to holders
> in
Indeed -- you must reinvent TCP over UDP, ultimately, to handle blocks
and large TXs.
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Andy Alness wrote:
> Awesome! I'm assuming this is it:
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=156769.0
>
> It would be interesting (at least to me) to take this a step furthe
Awesome! I'm assuming this is it:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=156769.0
It would be interesting (at least to me) to take this a step further
and offer UDP as a full TCP replacement capable of STUN-assisted NAT
traversal and possibly swarmed blockchain syncs. It would require open
TCP no
> >
> > In my opinion, the number of full nodes doesn't matter (as long as
> > it's enough to satisfy demand by other nodes).
> >
>
> Correct. Still, a high number of nodes has a few other benefits:
>
> 1) The more nodes there are, the cheaper it should be to run each one,
> given that the bandwidt
Yes, i spec'd out the UDP traversal of the P2P protocol. It seems
reasonable especially for "inv" messages.
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Andy Alness wrote:
> Has there ever been serious discussion on extending the protocol to
> support UDP transport? That would allow for NAT traversal and fo
Has there ever been serious discussion on extending the protocol to
support UDP transport? That would allow for NAT traversal and for many
more people to run effective nodes. I'm also curious if it could be
made improve block propagation time.
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Gmail wrote:
> Unlik
Actually I read the paper now as it was linked somewhere else also, and its
quite good. So now I can summarize it:
Its a writeup of bitcoin in 29 pages, which covers things in the original
bitcoin paper but with more detail of formats, scripts with some examples,
formats etc. Quite nice paper, c
Referring to the subsidy for miners as "wasting it on miners" isn't going to
garner you much favor.
On May 20, 2014 11:12:53 AM CDT, Stephen Reed wrote:
>I completed a whitepaper for Bitcoin a proof-of-stake version which
>uses a single nomadic verifiable mint agent and distributed replication
I completed a whitepaper for Bitcoin a proof-of-stake version which uses a
single nomadic verifiable mint agent and distributed replication of a single
blockchain by compensated full nodes to achieve 6-hop, sub-second transaction
acknowledgement times. Plus it pays dividends to holders instead o
Unlikely. I doubt any significant portion of miners in china will continue to
mine on a china-specific chain, since it will certainly be outmined by
non-Chinese miners, and will be orphaned eventually.
More likely is that mining interests in china will make special arrangements to
circumvent t
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:15:44AM +0200, bitcoingr...@gmx.com wrote:
>Recently China has updated its firewall blocking bitcoin sites and pools.
>Whether this is simple blacklist or more sophisticated packet targeting is
>uncertain, however this update did spefically target VPN handshak
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Adam Back wrote:
> hmm Yes and this topic now is more than a bit non dev related. Sorry about
> that. There seems to be no convenient mailing list format for non-dev stuff
> or I would Cc and set Reply-To for example? (Web forums somewhat suck IMO).
There is t
Yeah I'm expecting port 8333 to go away in China at some point. Actually I
was expecting that years ago and was kind of surprised that the suppression
was being done via banks. Guess the GFW operators were just slow to catch
up.
On 20 May 2014 10:16, wrote:
> Recently China has updated its firewa
Recently China has updated its firewall blocking bitcoin sites and pools. Whether this is simple blacklist or more sophisticated packet targeting is uncertain, however this update did spefically target VPN handshakes.
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2014 at 1:07 PM
From: Drak
To: "Mike Hearn"
Cc:
14 matches
Mail list logo
