Matt Corallo [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2015-10-14 📝 Original message:Huh? No... This is not a ...
📅 Original date posted:2015-10-14
📝 Original message:Huh? No... This is not a Bitcoin Core issue, it is a Bitcoin protocol one and should be discussed here, not on github.
I really appreciate Ittay and Emin's efforts in this space and their willingness to work with the Bitcoin community on it! It seems it still needs some tuning, but seems like if the pool-mining issues were resolved it could make block relay times irrelevant, at least.
Matt
On October 14, 2015 3:21:19 PM PDT, odinn via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA512
>
>This (Bitcoin-NG in concept) could be done as a (issue and pull
>request process) to Bitcoin Core itself, amirite? It seems like it
>would provide an interesting issue to open and have healthy discussion
>on both mailing list and github, adding the caveat that it would be at
>the user's option. Thus if something like Bitcoin-NG did come to be
>it would be something more like a feature that the user could activate
>/ deactivate from within Core. I assume it would be default off, but
>with the option to utilize. Code would thus be available to others as
>well. I am not saying yea or nay on it, just that it seems like this
>could be done.
>
>Some notes:
>
>Once a node generates a key block it becomes the leader. As a leader,
>the node is allowed to generate microblocks at a set rate
>smaller than a prede >ned maximum. A microblock in Bitcoin-NG
>contains ledger entries and a header. The header contains
>the reference to the previous block, the current GMT time, a
> cryptographic hash of its ledger entries, and a cryptographic
> signature of the header. The signature uses the private key
> that matches the public key in the latest key block in the chain.
>For a microblock to be valid, all its entries must be valid according
>to the specification of the state machine, and the signature has to be
>valid. However, the microblocks, it is said, don't affect the weight
>of the chain, because they do not contain proof of work. It is
>assumed by the authors of this model that this situation is critical
>for maintaining incentives here.
>
>The questions that then begin to emerge to me are how is this
>information managed and protected? The headers, thus containing
>reference(s) to previous block(s), current GMT time(s), cryptographic
>hash(es) of ledger entries, and cryptographic signature(s) of the
>headers, so forth, and other information. Can the Bitcoin-NG scheme
>be designed or implemented in a manner which supports Stealth sends,
>Confidential Transactions, or similar privacy measures? Or is this
>something which cannot be answered at this time?
>
>Emin Gün Sirer via bitcoin-dev:
>>> So it seems to me that all I need to do is figure out who the
>>> current
>> leader is,
>>> and DDoS him off the network to shut Bitcoin-NG down.
>>
>> Good point. If NG is layered on top of Bitcoin, we'd retain all of
>> Bitcoin as is. This would confer all the benefits of Bitcoin's
>> retrospective blocks, as well as add the ability to mint
>> microblocks with low latency in between. And despite the phrase
>> "the leader," the actual leader in NG is a key, not a specific
>> node. That makes it possible to deter DDoS attacks by dynamically
>> migrating where in the network the leader is operating in response
>> to an attack. Finally, DDoS attacks against miners are already
>> possible, but they seem rare, and I suspect it's at least partly
>> because of the success of Matt Corallo's high speed bitcoin relay
>> network. Similar defenses can apply here.
>>
>> - egs
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Bob McElrath <bob at mcelrath.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> So it seems to me that all I need to do is figure out who the
>>> current leader is, and DDoS him off the network to shut
>>> Bitcoin-NG down.
>>>
>>> This is a significant advantage to bitcoin's ex-post-facto
>>> blocks: no one knows where the next one will come from. The only
>>> way to shut the network down is to shut all nodes down.
>>>
>>> Emin Gün Sirer via bitcoin-dev
>>> [bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org] wrote:
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> We just released the whitepaper describing Bitcoin-NG, a new
>>>> technique
>>> for
>>>> addressing some of the scalability challenges faced by
>>>> Bitcoin.
>>> Surprisingly,
>>>> Bitcoin-NG can simultaneously increase throughput while
>>>> reducing
>>> latency, and
>>>> do so without impacting Bitcoin's open architecture or changing
>>>> its trust model. This post illustrates the core technique:
>>>> http://hackingdistributed.com/2015/10/14/bitcoin-ng/ while the
>>>> whitepaper has all the nitty gritty details:
>>>> http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.02037
>>>>
>>>> Fitting NG on top of the current Bitcoin blockchain is future
>>>> work that
>>> we
>>>> think is quite possible. NG is compatible with both Bitcoin as
>>>> is, as
>>> well as
>>>> Blockstream-like sidechains, and we currently are not planning
>>>> to compete commercially with either technology -- we see NG as
>>>> being complementary
>>> to both
>>>> efforts. This is pure science, published and shared with the
>>>> community to advance the state of blockchains and to help them
>>>> reach throughputs and latencies required of cutting edge
>>>> fintech applications. Perhaps it can
>>> be
>>>> adopted, or perhaps it can provide the spark of inspiration for
>>>> someone
>>> else to
>>>> come up with even better solutions.
>>>>
>>>> We would be delighted to hear your feedback. - Ittay Eyal and
>>>> E. Gün Sirer.
>>>>
>>>> !DSPAM:561e98cd301391127216946!
>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev
>>>> mailing list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> !DSPAM:561e98cd301391127216946!
>>>
>>> -- Cheers, Bob McElrath
>>>
>>> "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple,
>>> neat, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing
>> list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>
>- --
>http://abis.io ~
>"a protocol concept to enable decentralization
>and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
>https://keybase.io/odinn
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWHtVfAAoJEGxwq/inSG8C85kH/2T07oj/JM+bQcgy2kw9rtUa
>XHkMNn86kVvtaniSKQ2j+SO9q8HkUI9Rv0Pz+qbX1CyAm6Z1FTCtDKornCnxx7FW
>AJyZQSm5n40LUBIc3o2NBJvXKySTO2jpxluw0HAU8BQHSgFWwj1+vocqObDYxRCd
>YDlhGd2ITmF55TlR+9seWqRyW+gABUoS+SaxM2yZaqWFlUGyOhYCJYpIo1nfWCZi
>1F7/j0E92zu5kS5JJuRE91A4Si0LeTQPtPqXMeVm/UicdQB1a/aI0mzp6VRdm3Bo
>gE79r1sKFFgpbQcz68OzPAL3RFTm1Q/C5jcqdy6cQjgp9em/v4uOCS3TKLWlVNQ=
>=Einy
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>_______________________________________________
>bitcoin-dev mailing list
>bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
📝 Original message:Huh? No... This is not a Bitcoin Core issue, it is a Bitcoin protocol one and should be discussed here, not on github.
I really appreciate Ittay and Emin's efforts in this space and their willingness to work with the Bitcoin community on it! It seems it still needs some tuning, but seems like if the pool-mining issues were resolved it could make block relay times irrelevant, at least.
Matt
On October 14, 2015 3:21:19 PM PDT, odinn via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA512
>
>This (Bitcoin-NG in concept) could be done as a (issue and pull
>request process) to Bitcoin Core itself, amirite? It seems like it
>would provide an interesting issue to open and have healthy discussion
>on both mailing list and github, adding the caveat that it would be at
>the user's option. Thus if something like Bitcoin-NG did come to be
>it would be something more like a feature that the user could activate
>/ deactivate from within Core. I assume it would be default off, but
>with the option to utilize. Code would thus be available to others as
>well. I am not saying yea or nay on it, just that it seems like this
>could be done.
>
>Some notes:
>
>Once a node generates a key block it becomes the leader. As a leader,
>the node is allowed to generate microblocks at a set rate
>smaller than a prede >ned maximum. A microblock in Bitcoin-NG
>contains ledger entries and a header. The header contains
>the reference to the previous block, the current GMT time, a
> cryptographic hash of its ledger entries, and a cryptographic
> signature of the header. The signature uses the private key
> that matches the public key in the latest key block in the chain.
>For a microblock to be valid, all its entries must be valid according
>to the specification of the state machine, and the signature has to be
>valid. However, the microblocks, it is said, don't affect the weight
>of the chain, because they do not contain proof of work. It is
>assumed by the authors of this model that this situation is critical
>for maintaining incentives here.
>
>The questions that then begin to emerge to me are how is this
>information managed and protected? The headers, thus containing
>reference(s) to previous block(s), current GMT time(s), cryptographic
>hash(es) of ledger entries, and cryptographic signature(s) of the
>headers, so forth, and other information. Can the Bitcoin-NG scheme
>be designed or implemented in a manner which supports Stealth sends,
>Confidential Transactions, or similar privacy measures? Or is this
>something which cannot be answered at this time?
>
>Emin Gün Sirer via bitcoin-dev:
>>> So it seems to me that all I need to do is figure out who the
>>> current
>> leader is,
>>> and DDoS him off the network to shut Bitcoin-NG down.
>>
>> Good point. If NG is layered on top of Bitcoin, we'd retain all of
>> Bitcoin as is. This would confer all the benefits of Bitcoin's
>> retrospective blocks, as well as add the ability to mint
>> microblocks with low latency in between. And despite the phrase
>> "the leader," the actual leader in NG is a key, not a specific
>> node. That makes it possible to deter DDoS attacks by dynamically
>> migrating where in the network the leader is operating in response
>> to an attack. Finally, DDoS attacks against miners are already
>> possible, but they seem rare, and I suspect it's at least partly
>> because of the success of Matt Corallo's high speed bitcoin relay
>> network. Similar defenses can apply here.
>>
>> - egs
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Bob McElrath <bob at mcelrath.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> So it seems to me that all I need to do is figure out who the
>>> current leader is, and DDoS him off the network to shut
>>> Bitcoin-NG down.
>>>
>>> This is a significant advantage to bitcoin's ex-post-facto
>>> blocks: no one knows where the next one will come from. The only
>>> way to shut the network down is to shut all nodes down.
>>>
>>> Emin Gün Sirer via bitcoin-dev
>>> [bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org] wrote:
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> We just released the whitepaper describing Bitcoin-NG, a new
>>>> technique
>>> for
>>>> addressing some of the scalability challenges faced by
>>>> Bitcoin.
>>> Surprisingly,
>>>> Bitcoin-NG can simultaneously increase throughput while
>>>> reducing
>>> latency, and
>>>> do so without impacting Bitcoin's open architecture or changing
>>>> its trust model. This post illustrates the core technique:
>>>> http://hackingdistributed.com/2015/10/14/bitcoin-ng/ while the
>>>> whitepaper has all the nitty gritty details:
>>>> http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.02037
>>>>
>>>> Fitting NG on top of the current Bitcoin blockchain is future
>>>> work that
>>> we
>>>> think is quite possible. NG is compatible with both Bitcoin as
>>>> is, as
>>> well as
>>>> Blockstream-like sidechains, and we currently are not planning
>>>> to compete commercially with either technology -- we see NG as
>>>> being complementary
>>> to both
>>>> efforts. This is pure science, published and shared with the
>>>> community to advance the state of blockchains and to help them
>>>> reach throughputs and latencies required of cutting edge
>>>> fintech applications. Perhaps it can
>>> be
>>>> adopted, or perhaps it can provide the spark of inspiration for
>>>> someone
>>> else to
>>>> come up with even better solutions.
>>>>
>>>> We would be delighted to hear your feedback. - Ittay Eyal and
>>>> E. Gün Sirer.
>>>>
>>>> !DSPAM:561e98cd301391127216946!
>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev
>>>> mailing list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> !DSPAM:561e98cd301391127216946!
>>>
>>> -- Cheers, Bob McElrath
>>>
>>> "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple,
>>> neat, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing
>> list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>
>- --
>http://abis.io ~
>"a protocol concept to enable decentralization
>and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
>https://keybase.io/odinn
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWHtVfAAoJEGxwq/inSG8C85kH/2T07oj/JM+bQcgy2kw9rtUa
>XHkMNn86kVvtaniSKQ2j+SO9q8HkUI9Rv0Pz+qbX1CyAm6Z1FTCtDKornCnxx7FW
>AJyZQSm5n40LUBIc3o2NBJvXKySTO2jpxluw0HAU8BQHSgFWwj1+vocqObDYxRCd
>YDlhGd2ITmF55TlR+9seWqRyW+gABUoS+SaxM2yZaqWFlUGyOhYCJYpIo1nfWCZi
>1F7/j0E92zu5kS5JJuRE91A4Si0LeTQPtPqXMeVm/UicdQB1a/aI0mzp6VRdm3Bo
>gE79r1sKFFgpbQcz68OzPAL3RFTm1Q/C5jcqdy6cQjgp9em/v4uOCS3TKLWlVNQ=
>=Einy
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>_______________________________________________
>bitcoin-dev mailing list
>bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev