Running a Bitcoin Node - page 2. | Bitcointalksearch.org

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: DannyHamilton on February 21, 2014, 01:53:17 PM

Quote from: smooth on February 21, 2014, 01:51:28 PM

Hypothetically you could pay a peer in advance for the next 1000 transactions. The peer keeps a counter and stops relaying once the 1000 is up. Of course, in a p2p network you have to prevent cheating, etc. We agree this is unsolved.

Hypothetically, in the vacuum of space you could open your mouth and suck in a nice fresh breath of oxygen and nitrogen. Of course, you'd have to find a way around the laws of physics as we currently understand them. We agree this is unsolved.

I provided a link to a project at least working on p2p payment for bandwidth. Unless you can provide a link to a project working on humans breathing oxygen from space these are pretty different.

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 4801

Quote from: smooth on February 21, 2014, 01:51:28 PM

Hypothetically you could pay a peer in advance for the next 1000 transactions. The peer keeps a counter and stops relaying once the 1000 is up. Of course, in a p2p network you have to prevent cheating, etc. We agree this is unsolved.

Hypothetically, in the vacuum of space you could open your mouth and suck in a nice fresh breath of oxygen and nitrogen. Of course, you'd have to find a way around the laws of physics as we currently understand them. We agree this is unsolved.

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: DannyHamilton on February 21, 2014, 01:51:34 PM

Quote from: smooth on February 21, 2014, 01:38:59 PM

There are not 10 million full nodes

Perhaps not yet. I'm not sure how we would know.

"Full nodes" are available by public IP, otherwise they are private nodes. Public IPs can be collected from the network and counted. I think somebody (blockchain.info maybe?) publishes an approximate count. Last year the popularity of lightweight clients reduced the number of full nodes, although it may be on the way back up now. It's still pretty low.

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 4801

Quote from: smooth on February 21, 2014, 01:38:59 PM

Danny's example was entirely hypothetical.

Clearly.

Quote from: smooth on February 21, 2014, 01:38:59 PM

There are not 10 million full nodes

Perhaps not yet. I'm not sure how we would know.

Quote from: smooth on February 21, 2014, 01:38:59 PM

(I think there are a few thousand).

I think there are much more than that. I'd expect at least a few tens of thousands, and a few hundred thousand wouldn't surprise me.

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: DannyHamilton on February 21, 2014, 01:49:25 PM

Quote from: smooth on February 21, 2014, 01:28:20 PM

It could be done in bulk, say one fee for every 1000 or 10000 transactions (or a probabilistic equivalent).

How would all the peers know if I previously paid the transaction relay fee for a transaction that I'm sending now?

Hypothetically you could pay a peer in advance for the next 1000 transactions. The peer keeps a counter and stops relaying once the 1000 is up. Of course, in a p2p network you have to prevent cheating, etc. We agree this is unsolved.

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 4801

Quote from: smooth on February 21, 2014, 01:28:20 PM

It could be done in bulk, say one fee for every 1000 or 10000 transactions (or a probabilistic equivalent).

How would all the peers know if I previously paid the transaction relay fee for a transaction that I'm sending now?

Quote from: smooth on February 21, 2014, 01:28:20 PM

But the real answer is that no one has quite figured out how to build a p2p network that pays for bandwidth.

Exactly. Nobody has figured out a cost effective way to pay peers for relaying transactions. Until such a solution is discovered (if ever), I don't think there is any reason to discuss the idea that nodes "should" get paid to relay transactions. It feels a bit like discussing how humans "should" be able to breathe in a complete vacuum.

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: dserrano5 on February 21, 2014, 01:35:02 PM

Quote from: smooth on February 21, 2014, 01:28:20 PM

Quote from: DannyHamilton on February 21, 2014, 12:31:41 PM

If you want to guarantee that the miners and your intended recipient all receive the transaction, you'll need to pay a fee to EVERY single node on the network. If there are 10 million users all running full nodes, that would mean you'd have to pay a minimum fee of at least 0.00000001 BTC X 10 million = 0.1 BTC just for "relay fees". Then you'd have to pay a mining fee in addition to that.

It could be done in bulk, say one fee for every 1000 or 10000 transactions (or a probabilistic equivalent).

So because I run a node I'd get a satoshi per 1k or 10k transactions. Wow, the new wealthy elite! Sign me up!

Danny's example was entirely hypothetical. There are not 10 million full nodes (I think there are a few thousand). In some hypothetical future where a satoshi is worth a penny and there are thousands or even millions of transactions per second...

dserrano5

legendary

Activity: 1974

Merit: 1030

Quote from: smooth on February 21, 2014, 01:28:20 PM

Quote from: DannyHamilton on February 21, 2014, 12:31:41 PM

If you want to guarantee that the miners and your intended recipient all receive the transaction, you'll need to pay a fee to EVERY single node on the network. If there are 10 million users all running full nodes, that would mean you'd have to pay a minimum fee of at least 0.00000001 BTC X 10 million = 0.1 BTC just for "relay fees". Then you'd have to pay a mining fee in addition to that.

It could be done in bulk, say one fee for every 1000 or 10000 transactions (or a probabilistic equivalent).

So because I run a node I'd get a satoshi per 1k or 10k transactions. Wow, the new wealthy elite! Sign me up!

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: DannyHamilton on February 21, 2014, 12:31:41 PM

Quote from: rat on February 21, 2014, 11:48:06 AM

would nodes getting a fee encourage a more robust network?

Possibly, but it would become EXTREMELY expensive.

The smallest possible "fee" that can be paid with bitcoin is 0.00000001 BTC.

If you want to guarantee that the miners and your intended recipient all receive the transaction, you'll need to pay a fee to EVERY single node on the network. If there are 10 million users all running full nodes, that would mean you'd have to pay a minimum fee of at least 0.00000001 BTC X 10 million = 0.1 BTC just for "relay fees". Then you'd have to pay a mining fee in addition to that.

It could be done in bulk, say one fee for every 1000 or 10000 transactions (or a probabilistic equivalent).

But the real answer is that no one has quite figured out how to build a p2p network that pays for bandwidth. It is a work in progress. See https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitcloud-distributed-application-for-sharing-content-proof-of-bandwidth-415100

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 4801

Quote from: rat on February 21, 2014, 11:48:06 AM

would nodes getting a fee encourage a more robust network?

Possibly, but it would become EXTREMELY expensive.

The smallest possible "fee" that can be paid with bitcoin is 0.00000001 BTC.

If you want to guarantee that the miners and your intended recipient all receive the transaction, you'll need to pay a fee to EVERY single node on the network. If there are 10 million users all running full nodes, that would mean you'd have to pay a minimum fee of at least 0.00000001 BTC X 10 million = 0.1 BTC just for "relay fees". Then you'd have to pay a mining fee in addition to that.

Gabi

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1008

If you want to walk on water, get out of the boat

Quote

this clearly say the fee goes to the nodes that process the transactions not to the miners, am I misunderstand this?

Yup, you are misunderstanding it. "miner" is an informal word, who "process the transaction" is who put it in a block, so a miner. Nodes just relay it.

Quote

Agree. Lets kill the mining fees.

Can we send the electricity bill to you then? Will you pay all the expenses that mining (remember, mining is here for security) requires?

Holliday

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1012

Quote from: whtchocla7e on February 21, 2014, 12:06:43 PM

Quote from: Lauda on February 21, 2014, 11:56:31 AM

Quote from: rat on February 21, 2014, 11:48:06 AM

would nodes getting a fee encourage a more robust network?

People should help the network for the sake of the network, not for money.

Agree. Lets kill the mining fees.

Mining fees will eventually replace the block reward. It needs to be a gradual change.

Without fees/reward, not enough people will secure the network and it will be extremely vulnerable to attack.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 3000

Terminated.

Quote from: whtchocla7e on February 21, 2014, 12:06:43 PM

Agree. Lets kill the mining fees.

Mining and running a node is not the same.
Running a node has minor costs.

whtchocla7e

full member

Activity: 392

Merit: 116

Worlds Simplest Cryptocurrency Wallet

Quote from: Lauda on February 21, 2014, 11:56:31 AM

Quote from: rat on February 21, 2014, 11:48:06 AM

would nodes getting a fee encourage a more robust network?

People should help the network for the sake of the network, not for money.

Agree. Lets kill the mining fees.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 3000

Terminated.

Quote from: Holliday on February 21, 2014, 12:01:41 PM

Yeah, but this is planet Earth (sorry I've grown cynical as I've grown older).

I don't think the network is short on nodes (but I don't have the technical knowledge needed to know this for certain).

It might be short on mining nodes (since most hashers only sell hashing power to pools instead of actually mining).

Both points are correct. We have a fair amount of nodes, but we are short on mining ones.

Holliday

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1012

Quote from: Lauda on February 21, 2014, 11:56:31 AM

Quote from: rat on February 21, 2014, 11:48:06 AM

would nodes getting a fee encourage a more robust network?

People should help the network for the sake of the network, not for money.

Yeah, but this is planet Earth (sorry I've grown cynical as I've grown older).

I don't think the network is short on nodes (but I don't have the technical knowledge needed to know this for certain).

It might be short on mining nodes (since most hashers only sell hashing power to pools instead of actually mining).

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 3000

Terminated.

Quote from: rat on February 21, 2014, 11:48:06 AM

would nodes getting a fee encourage a more robust network?

People should help the network for the sake of the network, not for money.

drrussellshane

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Quote from: rat on February 21, 2014, 11:48:06 AM

would nodes getting a fee encourage a more robust network?

I suppose it might create incentive for more people to run full nodes.

I run multiple full nodes myself.

In a way, running a full node is its own reward.

rat

sr. member

Activity: 253

Merit: 250

would nodes getting a fee encourage a more robust network?

Holliday

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1012

Quote from: whtchocla7e on February 21, 2014, 11:26:09 AM

Why do nodes not get a cut of the fee? Without them there is no mining.

Miners do need to run nodes.

Hashers who get paid to submit hashing power to a miner (pool operator) do not need to run nodes.

Topic: Running a Bitcoin Node - page 2. (Read 5635 times)