<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwet</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwet</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2012-09-10&#xA;📝 Original message:On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Matthew Mitchell&#xA;&lt;matthewmitchell at godofgod.co.uk&gt; wrote:&#xA;&gt; Here is a BIP draft for improving the block relaying and validation so that&#xA;&gt; it can be done in parallel and so that redundancy can be removed. This&#xA;&gt; becomes more beneficial the larger the block sizes are.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/User:MatthewLM/ImprovedBlockRelayingProposal&#xA;&#xA;Why does this focus on actually sending the hash tree?  The block&#xA;header + transaction list + transactions a node doesn&#39;t already know&#xA;(often just the coinbase) is enough.</html></oembed>