Tamas Blummer [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2014-04-09 📝 Original message:YES Such a bitcoind is ...
📅 Original date posted:2014-04-09
📝 Original message:YES
Such a bitcoind is what I called border router in a previous mail.
Yes, SPV wallets are getting ahead of features, so people will use them also because on size just does not fit all, but all want to ensure being on the same trunk of the chain.
Therefore serious user of Bitcoin run a bitcoind as a border router and connect SPV wallets with higher functionality to that trusted node(s).
This is what I think the core should focus on: Being a lightweight superfast consensus building border router and nothing more. No wallet, no GUI, no RPC calls,
no Payment protocol and the rest.
Regards,
Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com
On 09.04.2014, at 17:29, Wladimir <laanwj at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This is primarily aimed at developers of SPV wallets.
>
> The recently reported decrease in number of full nodes could have several reasons, one of them that less people are running Bitcoin Core for the wallet because the other wallets are getting ahead in both features and useability.
>
> It's great to see innovation in wallets, but it's worrying that the number of full nodes decreases.
>
> It may be that lots of people would support the network by running a full node, but don't want to go through the trouble of installing bitcoin core separately (and get confused because it's a wallet, too).
>
> Hence I'd like to explore the idea of adding an option to popular SPV wallets, to spin a bitcoind process in the background. This could be pretty much transparent to the user - it would sync in the background, the wallet could show statistics about the node, but is not dependent on it.
>
> In exchange the user would get increased (full node level) security, as the SPV wallet would have a local trusted node.
>
> Does this sound like a good idea?
>
> Is there any way that Bitcoin Core can help to accomedate this 'embedded' usage? Specific Interfaces, special builds - maybe add a walletless bitcoind build to gitian - bindings, dlls, etc?
>
> Wladimir
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Put Bad Developers to Shame
> Dominate Development with Jenkins Continuous Integration
> Continuously Automate Build, Test & Deployment
> Start a new project now. Try Jenkins in the cloud.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/13600_Cloudbees_______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140409/714a611c/attachment.html>;
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140409/714a611c/attachment.sig>;
📝 Original message:YES
Such a bitcoind is what I called border router in a previous mail.
Yes, SPV wallets are getting ahead of features, so people will use them also because on size just does not fit all, but all want to ensure being on the same trunk of the chain.
Therefore serious user of Bitcoin run a bitcoind as a border router and connect SPV wallets with higher functionality to that trusted node(s).
This is what I think the core should focus on: Being a lightweight superfast consensus building border router and nothing more. No wallet, no GUI, no RPC calls,
no Payment protocol and the rest.
Regards,
Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com
On 09.04.2014, at 17:29, Wladimir <laanwj at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This is primarily aimed at developers of SPV wallets.
>
> The recently reported decrease in number of full nodes could have several reasons, one of them that less people are running Bitcoin Core for the wallet because the other wallets are getting ahead in both features and useability.
>
> It's great to see innovation in wallets, but it's worrying that the number of full nodes decreases.
>
> It may be that lots of people would support the network by running a full node, but don't want to go through the trouble of installing bitcoin core separately (and get confused because it's a wallet, too).
>
> Hence I'd like to explore the idea of adding an option to popular SPV wallets, to spin a bitcoind process in the background. This could be pretty much transparent to the user - it would sync in the background, the wallet could show statistics about the node, but is not dependent on it.
>
> In exchange the user would get increased (full node level) security, as the SPV wallet would have a local trusted node.
>
> Does this sound like a good idea?
>
> Is there any way that Bitcoin Core can help to accomedate this 'embedded' usage? Specific Interfaces, special builds - maybe add a walletless bitcoind build to gitian - bindings, dlls, etc?
>
> Wladimir
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Put Bad Developers to Shame
> Dominate Development with Jenkins Continuous Integration
> Continuously Automate Build, Test & Deployment
> Start a new project now. Try Jenkins in the cloud.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/13600_Cloudbees_______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140409/714a611c/attachment.html>;
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140409/714a611c/attachment.sig>;