📅 Original date posted:2017-06-19
📝 Original message:Several times. It's been debated if unconfirmed transactions are
necessary, methods of doing more private filtering have been suggested,
along with simply not filtering unconfirmed transactions at all. My
collected data suggests that there is very little use of BIP37 at
present, based on incoming connections to nodes I know end up in the DNS
seed responses (no "SPV" clients do their own peer management).
On 2017-06-19 12:58, Andreas Schildbach via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I'm not sure if this has been brought up elsewhere in this thread.
>
> This proposal doesn't seem to be a complete replacement of BIP37: It
> doesn't provide a filter for unconfirmed transactions like BIP37 does.
>
> That means that most light clients will continue to use BIP37 even if
> they may use this BIP as a supplement. Otherwise users would not get
> timely notification of incoming payments any more.
>
>
> On 06/01/2017 09:01 PM, Olaoluwa Osuntokun via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> Hi y'all,
>>
>> Alex Akselrod and I would like to propose a new light client BIP for
>> consideration:
>> *
>> https://github.com/Roasbeef/bips/blob/master/gcs_light_client.mediawiki
>> [...]
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
bfd at cock.lu [ARCHIVE] /
npub1md…gy6y7
2023-06-07 18:02:10
in reply to nevent1q…2g93
Author Public Key
npub1mdmqmt0prpddcexkljfzd40uf7nvrc56c7gsg2spn3lgcjghguxqwgy6y7Published at
2023-06-07 18:02:10Event JSON
{
"id": "def6bf40edb8e367a5e26ddd4dd868cc8a6c42b6db5a54745b4dc3563133d3f8",
"pubkey": "db760dade1185adc64d6fc9226d5fc4fa6c1e29ac791042a019c7e8c4917470c",
"created_at": 1686160930,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"55a56c7ebba05dd9613a9ae00ae6d5bbfa4f7fd0155fa447a7d09d61ff658a4b",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"1181eabbb98b5826044e2c2ce149540de6fa9a5a2169a84978442b91e6a5a6db",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"3215b3d77dff1f84eeb5ad46fb1206a8d1657b3ea765a80b5489ece3a702d2bc"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-06-19\n📝 Original message:Several times. It's been debated if unconfirmed transactions are \nnecessary, methods of doing more private filtering have been suggested, \nalong with simply not filtering unconfirmed transactions at all. My \ncollected data suggests that there is very little use of BIP37 at \npresent, based on incoming connections to nodes I know end up in the DNS \nseed responses (no \"SPV\" clients do their own peer management).\n\n\nOn 2017-06-19 12:58, Andreas Schildbach via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e I'm not sure if this has been brought up elsewhere in this thread.\n\u003e \n\u003e This proposal doesn't seem to be a complete replacement of BIP37: It\n\u003e doesn't provide a filter for unconfirmed transactions like BIP37 does.\n\u003e \n\u003e That means that most light clients will continue to use BIP37 even if\n\u003e they may use this BIP as a supplement. Otherwise users would not get\n\u003e timely notification of incoming payments any more.\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e On 06/01/2017 09:01 PM, Olaoluwa Osuntokun via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e\u003e Hi y'all,\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e Alex Akselrod and I would like to propose a new light client BIP for\n\u003e\u003e consideration:\n\u003e\u003e * \n\u003e\u003e https://github.com/Roasbeef/bips/blob/master/gcs_light_client.mediawiki\n\u003e\u003e [...]\n\u003e \n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev",
"sig": "c6b3098ce4616a6b897c05720debe72c5388ee28cc1c7e7e707c7b9675e515554154734953a192a86f604da259a509ce67b489d08f8fa9b02bf595e5ab2227bd"
}