Utreexo Nodes

> Hello all,
>
> Tadge Dryja, Davidson Souza, and I would like to propose 3 BIPs describing
> Utreexo, a consensus-compatible (non-soft fork) way to send and verify
> transactions without storing the full UTXO set.
>
> The 3 BIPs are for:
>
>    1. The specification of the Utreexo accumulator.
>    2. The specification of Bitcoin block and tx validation using the
>    Utreexo accumulator.
>    3. The peer to peer networking changes required to enable Utreexo
>    nodes.
>
>
> We are currently looking for conceptual review. Do note that the documents
> are not final, and they will be updated.
>
> All of the BIPs can be found here: https://github.com/utreexo/biptreexo
>
> We thank you in advance for your time and consideration.
>
> Best,
> Calvin
>

> Hi Calvin, Tadge, Davidson,
> Thanks for sharing this important work ...it's exciting to see Utreexo
> maturing into a full BIP proposal. The modular split into accumulator,
> validation, and P2P layers is very clean and helpful for review.
> After a quick conceptual and implementation-level analysis, I believe
> there's a critical detail missing from the current accumulator spec: a
> deterministic order for processing UTXO deletions and additions per block.
> Aside from that, the spec is well written and shows deep consideration.
> Best regards,
>
> El martes, 29 de julio de 2025 a las 20:26:42 UTC-3, Calvin Kim escribió:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> Tadge Dryja, Davidson Souza, and I would like to propose 3 BIPs
>> describing Utreexo, a consensus-compatible (non-soft fork) way to send and
>> verify transactions without storing the full UTXO set.
>>
>> The 3 BIPs are for:
>>
>>    1. The specification of the Utreexo accumulator.
>>    2. The specification of Bitcoin block and tx validation using the
>>    Utreexo accumulator.
>>    3. The peer to peer networking changes required to enable Utreexo
>>    nodes.
>>
>>
>> We are currently looking for conceptual review. Do note that the
>> documents are not final, and they will be updated.
>>
>> All of the BIPs can be found here: https://github.com/utreexo/biptreexo
>>
>> We thank you in advance for your time and consideration.
>>
>> Best,
>> Calvin
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/e007ba14-c66d-4e8c-9b9e-adb2c4025be5n%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/e007ba14-c66d-4e8c-9b9e-adb2c4025be5n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

> Hello all,
>
> Tadge Dryja, Davidson Souza, and I would like to propose 3 BIPs
> describing Utreexo, a consensus-compatible (non-soft fork) way to send
> and verify transactions without storing the full UTXO set.
>
> The 3 BIPs are for:
>
>  1. The specification of the Utreexo accumulator.
>  2. The specification of Bitcoin block and tx validation using the
>     Utreexo accumulator.
>  3. The peer to peer networking changes required to enable Utreexo nodes.
>
>
> We are currently looking for conceptual review. Do note that the
> documents are not final, and they will be updated.
>
> All of the BIPs can be found here: https://github.com/utreexo/biptreexo
>
> We thank you in advance for your time and consideration.
>
> Best,
> Calvin
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/3452b63c-ff2b-4dd9-90ee-83fd9cedcf4an%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/3452b63c-ff2b-4dd9-90ee-83fd9cedcf4an%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

> Hello Calvin and all,
>
> Thank you for sharing your drafts. I skimmed your proposals and found
> them to be shaping up nicely. I didn’t notice anything worth conceptual
> feedback at this time, but will have plenty comments later in the
> process when they are more fitting. Obviously, utreexo has had a lot of
> discussion in the past already and these proposals are fairly close to
> the editorial requirements, so please feel free to open pull requests
> for the proposals whenever you feel ready to do so.
>
> Cheers,
> Murch
>
> On 2025-07-29 16:20, Calvin Kim wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > Tadge Dryja, Davidson Souza, and I would like to propose 3 BIPs
> > describing Utreexo, a consensus-compatible (non-soft fork) way to send
> > and verify transactions without storing the full UTXO set.
> >
> > The 3 BIPs are for:
> >
> > 1. The specification of the Utreexo accumulator.
> > 2. The specification of Bitcoin block and tx validation using the
> > Utreexo accumulator.
> > 3. The peer to peer networking changes required to enable Utreexo nodes.
> >
> >
> > We are currently looking for conceptual review. Do note that the
> > documents are not final, and they will be updated.
> >
> > All of the BIPs can be found here: https://github.com/utreexo/biptreexo
> >
> > We thank you in advance for your time and consideration.
> >
> > Best,
> > Calvin
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> > an email to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups•com.
> > To view this discussion visit
> >
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/3452b63c-ff2b-4dd9-90ee-83fd9cedcf4an%40googlegroups.com
> > <
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/3452b63c-ff2b-4dd9-90ee-83fd9cedcf4an%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
> >.
>