Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Lightning-dev] On the scalability issues of onboarding millions of LN mobile clients

2020-05-05 Thread Olaoluwa Osuntokun via bitcoin-dev
Hi Antoine, > Even with cheaper, more efficient protocols like BIP 157, you may have a > huge discrepancy between what is asked and what is offered. Assuming 10M > light clients [0] each of them consuming ~100MB/month for filters/headers, > that means you're asking 1PB/month of traffic to the

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Lightning-dev] On the scalability issues of onboarding millions of LN mobile clients

2020-05-05 Thread John Newbery via bitcoin-dev
There doesn't seem to be anything in the original email that's specific to BIP 157. It's a restatement of the arguments against light clients: - light clients are a burden on the full nodes that serve them - if light clients become more popular, there won't be enough full nodes to serve them -

Re: [bitcoin-dev] On the scalability issues of onboarding millions of LN mobile clients

2020-05-05 Thread Lloyd Fournier via bitcoin-dev
On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 9:01 PM Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Tuesday 05 May 2020 10:17:37 Antoine Riard via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > Trust-minimization of Bitcoin security model has always relied first and > > above on running a full-node. This

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Lightning-dev] On the scalability issues of onboarding millions of LN mobile clients

2020-05-05 Thread ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev
Good morning ariard and luke-jr > > Trust-minimization of Bitcoin security model has always relied first and > > above on running a full-node. This current paradigm may be shifted by LN > > where fast, affordable, confidential, censorship-resistant payment services > > may attract a lot of

Re: [bitcoin-dev] On the scalability issues of onboarding millions of LN mobile clients

2020-05-05 Thread Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
On Tuesday 05 May 2020 10:17:37 Antoine Riard via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Trust-minimization of Bitcoin security model has always relied first and > above on running a full-node. This current paradigm may be shifted by LN > where fast, affordable, confidential, censorship-resistant payment services >

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP-341: Committing to all scriptPubKeys in the signature message

2020-05-05 Thread Jonas Nick via bitcoin-dev
This is a reasonable suggestion. Committing to every spent scriptPubKey and therefore every element of the TxOut instead of just the amount makes sense conceptually. And it would be a small diff (~4 lines + rationale) compared to the current bip-taproot version. As far aas I understand, coinjoin

[bitcoin-dev] On the scalability issues of onboarding millions of LN mobile clients

2020-05-05 Thread Antoine Riard via bitcoin-dev
Hi, (cross-posting as it's really both layers concerned) Ongoing advancement of BIP 157 implementation in Core maybe the opportunity to reflect on the future of light client protocols and use this knowledge to make better-informed decisions about what kind of infrastructure is needed to support