📅 Original date posted:2011-11-09
🗒️ Summary of this message: Direct-connection negotiation is best for lightweight clients; a new P2P network could be built for block headers and transaction info. 0-value outputs can be spent.
📝 Original message:For now I think requiring direct-connection negotiation is best for these kinds of things. A direct connection is OK in most cases, and more complicated schemes will be more likely to fail. Maybe the IP transactions protocol can be used.
In the future, I imagine that users of ultra-lightweight clients will connect to a new P2P network built on top of the core Bitcoin network in order to receive block headers and info about sent/received transactions without leeching off of the few full nodes. This network could also be used for indirect transaction negotiation, which is similar to the goal of finding your own received transactions.
On Wednesday, November 09, 2011 3:02 PM, "Gavin Andresen" <gavinandresen at gmail.com> wrote:
> a nValue=0 transaction can be considered 'immediately spent'
I believe it's possible to spend a 0-value output, so they can't be considered automatically spent.
theymos [ARCHIVE] /
npub10v…mper0
2023-06-07 02:38:38
in reply to nevent1q…68wn
Author Public Key
npub10vt6y7m6shn8hfuj83zjlwcga4fky38kv73qz6xlcvtj4q7fjt0sqmper0Seen on
wss://relay.nostr.bandPublished at
2023-06-07 02:38:38Event JSON
{
"id": "91a4f85f733f837a920794250ea3cbbc1588509f89e08bb44fe19ec4f6c055e1",
"pubkey": "7b17a27b7a85e67ba7923c452fbb08ed536244f667a20168dfc3172a83c992df",
"created_at": 1686105518,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"a7fd8b1daaa858237747bd2300e513940cf62340eedfc2d0e5c06a3e24e868d2",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"848e28ddb19bc764c4d89909ef7f46e6bae6f5c65d4ef9ee59527f50b4759c48",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"d52a1b72551bba47beb14639a1b6f5e6cd98603ecbaaa6ab02031708d9cc4473"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2011-11-09\n🗒️ Summary of this message: Direct-connection negotiation is best for lightweight clients; a new P2P network could be built for block headers and transaction info. 0-value outputs can be spent.\n📝 Original message:For now I think requiring direct-connection negotiation is best for these kinds of things. A direct connection is OK in most cases, and more complicated schemes will be more likely to fail. Maybe the IP transactions protocol can be used.\n\nIn the future, I imagine that users of ultra-lightweight clients will connect to a new P2P network built on top of the core Bitcoin network in order to receive block headers and info about sent/received transactions without leeching off of the few full nodes. This network could also be used for indirect transaction negotiation, which is similar to the goal of finding your own received transactions.\n\nOn Wednesday, November 09, 2011 3:02 PM, \"Gavin Andresen\" \u003cgavinandresen at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e a nValue=0 transaction can be considered 'immediately spent'\n\nI believe it's possible to spend a 0-value output, so they can't be considered automatically spent.",
"sig": "14cba1fa1e172ec88b65a86ccc4769e5039498f4fb2b99d5c5dc9e0f24b4e36168a46580289cc8e3486fe0d85658d8939bf94768fa40a6ed44fba9ab0c050a30"
}