On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Elden Tyrell <tyrell.el...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2012-01-02 05:31:19 -0800, Christian Decker said: >> Later full blocks would be required to detect usable inputs for future >> outgoing transactions. > > Er, yes, this is what I meant; I guess I should have been more specific. > > So, a paranoid client cannot confirm reciept of coins until it has an > unstubbed copy of the entire chain. It can do other things (like send > coins) using a stubbed chain, but it needs the whole unstubbed chain in > order to be sure that incoming coins haven't already been spent. > > Thanks for confirming this.
Er, no— if a node controls the private keys for a transaction, and that transaction makes it into the chain then it can safely assume that its unspent (at least once its buried a few blocks into the chain). This is the essence of a SPV node. What it can't do is perform this function for txn which aren't its own. Though the system could be extended in a compatible manner to make this possible: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=21995.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a complex infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access to virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI infrastructure costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
