If the IP discovery is your main motivation, why don't you introduce some onion
routing into transactions? That would solve this problem easily, of course
there is an overhead which will slightly slow down the relay of transactions
but not significantly, also make it an option not enforced, for
> On Mar 27, 2015, at 8:16 AM, Matt Whitlock wrote:
>
> Isn't the goal of this exercise to ensure more full nodes on the network?
Basically we're talking about a form of Sybil defense and better quantifying
true blockchain resiliency by proof of storage.
In this case the goal is to see if we
On Friday, 27 March 2015, at 4:57 pm, Wladimir J. van der Laan wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 11:16:43AM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:
> > I agree that someone could do this, but why is that a problem? Isn't the
> > goal of this exercise to ensure more full nodes on the network? In order to
> > b
On Friday, 27 March 2015, at 4:57 pm, Wladimir J. van der Laan wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 11:16:43AM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:
> > I agree that someone could do this, but why is that a problem? Isn't the
> > goal of this exercise to ensure more full nodes on the network? In order to
> > b
The main motivation is to try and stop a single entity running lots of
nodes in order to harvest transaction origin IPs. That's what's behind
this.
Probably the efforts are a waste of time.. if someone has to keep a few
hundred copies of the blockchain around in order to keep IP specific
preco
I agree that someone could do this, but why is that a problem? Isn't the goal
of this exercise to ensure more full nodes on the network? In order to be able
to answer the challenges, an entity would need to be running a full node
somewhere. Thus, they have contributed at least one additional ful
Basically the problem with that is that someone could setup a single
full node that has the blockchain and can answer those challenges and
then a bunch of other non-full nodes that just proxy any such challenges
to the single full node.
Rob
On 2015-03-26 23:04, Matt Whitlock wrote:
> Maybe I'm
7 matches
Mail list logo