rich1.0npub1e46n428mcyfwznl7nlsf6d3s7rhlwm9x3cmkuqzt3emmdpadmkaqqjxmcuhttps://nostr.ae/npub1e46n428mcyfwznl7nlsf6d3s7rhlwm9x3cmkuqzt3emmdpadmkaqqjxmcunjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2018-05-17 📝 Original message:(1) can be accomplished by filtering for the set of outputs in the transaction you created. I agree (2) would ideally be done to avoid issues with a copied wallet (theft or not), but I am worried about the size of the filters themselves, not just the size of the blocks downloaded after a match. On May 17, 2018 3:43:15 PM UTC, Peter Todd <pete at petertodd.org> wrote: >On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 11:25:12AM -0400, Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev >wrote: >> BIP 158 currently includes the following in the "basic" filter: 1) >> txids, 2) output scripts, 3) input prevouts. >> >> I believe (1) could be skipped entirely - there is almost no reason >why >> you'd not be able to filter for, eg, the set of output scripts in a >> transaction you know about and (2) and (3) may want to be split out - >> many wallets may wish to just find transactions paying to them, as >> transactions spending from their outputs should generally be things >> they've created. > >So I think we have two cases where wallets want to find txs spending >from their >outputs: > >1) Waiting for a confirmation >2) Detecting theft > >The former can be turned off once there are no expected unconfirmed >transactions. > >As for the latter, this is probably a valuable thing for wallets to do. >Modulo >reorgs, reducing the frequency that you check for stolen funds doesn't >decrease >total bandwidth cost - it's one filter match per block regardless - but >perhaps >the real-world bandwidth cost can be reduced by, say, waiting for a >wifi >connection rather than using cellular data. > >-- >https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20180517/d64f3e3b/attachment.html>