1 2016-05-07 11:45:02 <jonasschnelli> wallet42: yes. I know curvecp. But the BIPs I started to write use a different approach. Curvecp is nice, but it's effect is on a different OSI layer.
 2 2016-05-07 16:49:04 <Moleniorot> Hi guys
 3 2016-05-07 16:49:44 <Moleniorot> I have a problem with my Bitcoin Core: I have a few non-broadcasted transactions that only exist on my Core instance and I don't want Core to try to broadcast them again - how can I remove those transactions?
 4 2016-05-07 17:07:09 <hidden> i found a wallet (applicationdata folder) directory from my old hard drive and its from early 2013. what is addr.dat?
 5 2016-05-07 17:08:04 <hidden> nvm
 6 2016-05-07 19:52:35 <Lucifer333> hello
 7 2016-05-07 19:53:31 <Lucifer333> I understand the concept of a block locater, but how can your client distinguish between the most likely  best branch and and an orphan
 8 2016-05-07 19:53:57 <Lucifer333> How does it know it is on an orphan? can someone direct me to the module in the code? I have been digging for some time
 9 2016-05-07 20:48:00 <belcher> Lucifer333 the best branch is the one that has the most work
10 2016-05-07 20:48:27 <belcher> so a node figures out its on an orphan when it receives another branch that has more work than its orphan
11 2016-05-07 20:48:57 <belcher> btw the name 'orphan' is confusing, its called that because they contain transactions which have no parents, so they are orphans
12 2016-05-07 20:49:05 <belcher> a better name for such blocks might be 'stales'
13 2016-05-07 21:05:48 <Lucifer333> Ok, so this is not an "orphan" problem, that is a seperate issue
14 2016-05-07 21:05:59 <Lucifer333> sorry was afk belcher
15 2016-05-07 21:06:20 <Lucifer333> can I use an message command example?
16 2016-05-07 21:06:38 <belcher> what do you mean ?
17 2016-05-07 21:06:52 <Lucifer333> ok, let me explain
18 2016-05-07 21:06:56 <Lucifer333> i looked int the code
19 2016-05-07 21:07:12 <Lucifer333> and i see it sends "getaddr"
20 2016-05-07 21:07:44 <Lucifer333> then computes its own best branch (accourding to itself) and creates a locator object
21 2016-05-07 21:07:49 <Lucifer333> it sends the locator
22 2016-05-07 21:08:04 <Lucifer333> and the other node repleys with "blocks" command
23 2016-05-07 21:08:14 <Lucifer333> so far so good?
24 2016-05-07 21:09:10 <Lucifer333> no
25 2016-05-07 21:09:11 <Lucifer333> wait
26 2016-05-07 21:09:19 <Lucifer333> the blocks are inventory items
27 2016-05-07 21:09:29 <Lucifer333> type 2 "MSG_BLOCK"
28 2016-05-07 21:10:19 <Lucifer333> the client sends "getblocks" and the other endpoint replies with "inv"
29 2016-05-07 21:13:03 <Lucifer333> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_documentation#block
30 2016-05-07 21:13:05 <Lucifer333> got it
31 2016-05-07 21:13:36 <Lucifer333> ok, so how does it determine "most work", I am not getting that concept, is that just the existance of "more blocks" on that perticular branch?
32 2016-05-07 21:14:02 <Lucifer333> it gets a bunch of inventory vectors, .. and then what?
33 2016-05-07 21:18:51 <waxwing> Lucifer333: the total cumulative work done in all the blocks along that chain back to the genesis (I think)
34 2016-05-07 21:19:25 <waxwing> note how it would be totally unsound to measure only with block height
35 2016-05-07 21:26:04 <Lucifer333> waxwing, how is it measured then?
36 2016-05-07 21:27:34 <waxwing> well the block hash has to be below a target right .. not sure if it measures in terms of the actual hash or the target. sure someone around here will know.
37 2016-05-07 21:28:02 <waxwing> i guess it must be the actual hash value, not the target, that wouldn't make sense i think
38 2016-05-07 21:28:20 <belcher> it means in terms of the target
39 2016-05-07 21:28:36 <belcher> the nBits field in the block header, the miner has to set this before they start hashing
40 2016-05-07 21:28:52 <waxwing> but wouldn't that result in too many ties? since the target is the same for two candidates
41 2016-05-07 21:29:09 <belcher> the tiebreaker is whichever chain ends up longer
42 2016-05-07 21:29:25 <waxwing> ok, that works too, right
43 2016-05-07 21:29:40 <belcher> yep, thats why more confirmations is better
44 2016-05-07 21:30:08 <belcher> so if your tx has one confirmation, theres a chance that some % of the mining power is working on a block that would orphan it
45 2016-05-07 21:57:51 <Lucifer333> I am just looking at the block relay mechanism
46 2016-05-07 21:58:17 <Lucifer333> and I your answer to my question is not clear, was it an answer to my question?
47 2016-05-07 21:58:53 <belcher> which part Lucifer333 ?