{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1g6vxlp4e0nyhs2dqxxcryztyf5f5hyuaq93nw4r87zcnv0sdsa0qqsl5wd","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1g6vxlp4e0nyhs2dqxxcryztyf5f5hyuaq93nw4r87zcnv0sdsa0qqsl5wd","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-05-29\n📝 Original message:On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Mike Hearn \u003cmike at plan99.net\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e IMO it's not even clear there needs to be a size limit at all. Currently\n\u003e the 32mb message cap imposes one anyway\n\u003e\n\nIf the plan is a fix once and for all, then that should be changed too.  It\ncould be set so that it is at least some multiple of the max block size\nallowed.\n\nAlternatively, the merkle block message already incorporates the required\nfunctionality.\n\nSend\n- headers message (with 1 header)\n- merkleblock messages (max 1MB per message)\n\nThe transactions for each merkleblock could be sent directly before each\nmerkleblock, as is currently the case.\n\nThat system can send a block of any size.  It would require a change to the\nprocessing of any merkleblocks received.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150529/21895008/attachment.html\u003e"}