In think topic let’s think about the strength of the network and using of limited nodes.
About this problem:
There are multiple of examples of using the light or limited nodes with a wallet. There are examples:
- Grin has discussion about the ‘light’ node. It looks great form the mobile devices, not much power needed to run it. But with node will not be able to participate in the Sync model. Please note, so far it is not implemented.
- Beam announced the ‘light’ node, it is part of the latest mobile wallet. Such nodes can’t participate in the sync, they can only consume the traffic, but can’t provide it.
- Our QT wallet embedded node that runs without the TOR. Normally user runs QT wallet behind the firewall, so node unable to accept the connections. Even it has the full data, it can’t provide it.
Example of what can happens if we go this direction.
Currently Dogecoin mainnet is suffering with sync. In the node logs I see that about 90% of the peers height is below the tip and majority of the nodes rejecting connection. The testnet is doing fine. As result I was able to sync with testnet without problems, but for the mainnet that will take probably weeks.
This problem happens because Doge wallet run a node exactly as our old QT wallet without the TOR. As a result most users runs wallet behind the router firewall (nobody want to setup port forwarding), IP6 is not supported as well. As a result the nodes with public IPs are overloaded.
Doge dev team is aware about that but there is nothing what they can do. New wallets are not able to sync. They suggest retrieve wallet private keys and migrate to the wallets that are using public node (it is now our QT wallets runs majority of our users). I think Doge devs see that it is impossible for them to deploy so many nodes with public IPs. Also this makes network centralized because nodes with public IPs will run under the same service provides like AWS.
The most ironic that this situation happens because of the recent pump. Pump happens, more users come and install the wallet. And those new wallets killing the network.
Unless new wallets doesn’t contribute to the network strength, this situation will be applicable to any coin. Since “light” or limited nodes doesn’t contribute to the network strength but instead make it overloaded, it is wrong way to go. The wallet node must be full node that can accept the connections. Light alternative can be public node.
I think we can even rephrase that it is impossible to build large scale decentralized network if wallet nodes are not full nodes that can accept connections.