--- Day changed Wed Nov 13 2019
00:16 -!- Moller40 [~mr@82.103.128.151] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
00:18 -!- Moller40 [~mr@82.103.130.178] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
00:59 -!- b10c [~Thunderbi@muedsl-82-207-236-016.citykom.de] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
01:22 -!- Moller40 [~mr@82.103.130.178] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]     
01:24 -!- Moller40_ [~mr@82.103.128.151] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
02:17 -!- Moller40_ [~mr@82.103.128.151] has quit [Quit: -a- Connection Timed Out]     
02:18 -!- Moller40 [~mr@82.103.128.151] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
02:20 -!- Moller40 [~mr@82.103.128.151] has quit [Client Quit]     
02:53 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e35:8aba:8220:6627:dad:d967:649d] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]     
03:04 -!- orfeas [81d75b21@dhcp-91-033.inf.ed.ac.uk] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
03:48 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
04:20 -!- jonatack [~jon@213.152.161.74] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
04:47 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
04:55 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
05:13 -!- jonatack [~jon@213.152.161.74] has quit [Quit: jonatack]     
05:49 -!- rottensox [~rottensox@unaffiliated/rottensox] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
05:50 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]     
05:52 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
06:40 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.164.55.120] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
06:50 -!- xoyi- [~xoyi-@185.6.78.108] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
07:12 -!- HighOnBtc [~Admin@86.121.55.235] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]     
07:43 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.164.55.120] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]     
07:58 < orfeas> is the name `taproot_sign_script()` a slight abuse of the term "sign"? The sigining algorithm isn't invoked in the function
07:58 < orfeas> an alternative could be `taproot_generate_script_sig()` or similar
07:59 < instagibbs> that would sound like scriptSig, which segwit v1 never touches
07:59 < orfeas> correct
08:05 < orfeas> `taproot_prove_script()` or `taproot_choose_script_path()` then?
08:07 < sipa> orfeas: i think signing is an acceptable term
08:08 < sipa> orfeas: in the sense that you see a scriptPubKey as the public key of the "script" digital signature system, and the scriptSig/witness is the signature for it
08:12 < orfeas> I feel this is a complete redefinition of the terms "public key" and "signature".
08:13 < orfeas> (note that I'm biased: I always found the terms script{PubKey,Sig} somewhat confusing)
08:14 < instagibbs> it was redefined 11 years ago, sorry :P
08:14 < instagibbs> err I guess 10 still
08:15 < orfeas> '=D     
08:16 < orfeas> fair enough
08:23 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e35:8aba:8220:6627:dad:d967:649d] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
08:33 -!- andytoshi [~apoelstra@wpsoftware.net] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
08:33 -!- andytoshi [~apoelstra@wpsoftware.net] has quit [Changing host]     
08:33 -!- andytoshi [~apoelstra@unaffiliated/andytoshi] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
09:36 -!- so [~so@unaffiliated/so] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
09:48 < devrandom> trivial wording improvements from yesterday Q&A https://github.com/sipa/bips/pull/144
10:04 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
10:25 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
10:36 -!- HighOnBtc [~Admin@86.121.55.235] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
12:12 -!- xoyi- [~xoyi-@154.57.11.173] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
12:13 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
12:17 -!- HighOnBtc [~Admin@86.121.55.235] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
12:17 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
12:31 -!- xoyi- [~xoyi-@154.57.11.173] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]     
12:45 -!- rottensox [~rottensox@unaffiliated/rottensox] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
12:45 -!- rottensox [~rottensox@unaffiliated/rottensox] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
12:58 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
12:59 -!- b10c [~Thunderbi@muedsl-82-207-236-016.citykom.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
13:05 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
13:15 -!- orfeas [81d75b21@dhcp-91-033.inf.ed.ac.uk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
14:00 < pinheadmz> sipa: is a witness with an annex non-standard?
14:00 < pinheadmz> https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/blob/taproot/test/functional/feature_taproot.py#L390
14:18 -!- b10c [~Thunderbi@muedsl-82-207-236-016.citykom.de] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
14:34 < instagibbs> pinheadmz, look at `IsWitnessStandard` definition in the taproot branch, doesn't appear to be non-standard
14:35 < instagibbs> could be reading it wrong of course, but it's covered by the sighash, so it's not malleable by third party
14:56 < andytoshi> pinheadmz: sipa tells me "yes absolutely. any annex at all is currently nonstandard"
14:56 < andytoshi> but he is driving rn and cannot respond himself
14:58 < pinheadmz> andytoshi: ha! thank you for relaying, and for driving safely!
14:59 < instagibbs> I'd appreciate a pointer in the reference code, I am apparently blind
14:59 < pinheadmz> instagibbs: link ^^
14:59 < pinheadmz> I was looking at the pyhton test
15:00 < instagibbs> reference implementation meaning the C++ logic which makes it non-standard
15:00 < pinheadmz> id have to look, just saw this line in the test
15:00 < pinheadmz> https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/blob/taproot/test/functional/feature_taproot.py#L390
15:00 < pinheadmz> and didnt see anything calling annexes non-std in the bip
15:01 < instagibbs> standardness isn't generally BIP material
15:01 < andytoshi> heh i can take a look
15:01 < andytoshi> but i won't know better than ou
15:01 < pinheadmz> instagibbs: oh really? We wouldn't want to mention it?
15:02 < andytoshi> because it's a Core implementation detail, arguably
15:02 < andytoshi> (well, this is a very idealized view of standardness)
15:02 < pinheadmz> yeah and if I'm not mistaken, has no defined function (yet)
15:04 < pinheadmz> Does CLEANSTACK apply to the witness stack? Is that where the annex becomes non-std?
15:06 < andytoshi> pinheadmz: no, it's explicit :)
15:06 < andytoshi> pieter says there is a VERIFY flag for it
15:06 < andytoshi> that you should be able to grep for
15:10 < pinheadmz> Can he remember the line number without taking his eyes off the road? X-D
15:12 < pinheadmz> here we go
15:12 < pinheadmz> https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/blob/taproot/src/policy/policy.h#L76
15:12 < pinheadmz> SCRIPT_VERIFY_DISCOURAGE_UNKNOWN_ANNEX
15:12 < andytoshi> lol that's the one
15:13 -!- pinheadmz [~matthewzi@pool-100-33-69-78.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: pinheadmz]     
15:29 -!- b10c [~Thunderbi@muedsl-82-207-236-016.citykom.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
15:40 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
16:21 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
16:41 -!- HighOnBtc [~Admin@86.121.55.235] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
16:42 -!- davterra [~none@195.242.213.120] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
17:31 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]     
17:40 < sipa> q&a in 20 minutes?
17:43 <@aj> yep     
17:44 <@aj> sipa: you able to be around for the full hour? i'll need to get on a plane part way through
17:44 < sipa> no, i probably won't be
17:45 < sipa> or rather, i'll be here the whole hour but only intermittently
17:56 -!- soju [uid403160@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-xbxryqnnquoemlev] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]     
18:00 <@aj> #startmeeting
18:00 < lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Nov 14 02:00:55 2019 UTC.  The chair is aj. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:00 < lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
18:01 -!- Tibo [7c2353a2@124x35x83x162.ap124.ftth.ucom.ne.jp] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
18:01 <@aj> hey all, might be an abbreviated session this time
18:02 -!- soju [uid403160@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ujnbswrsbuznqxph] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
18:05 < instagibbs> hi     
18:06 < fanquake> hi     
18:09 < instagibbs> did we run out of topics for this week or am i disconnected
18:09 <@aj> doesn't seem like anyone's got any questions
18:10 < fanquake> instagibbs I'm not seeing any chatter either
18:11 < instagibbs> were they any lingering disccusions from last QA? I missed t
18:13 <@aj> there was a fair bit of discussion about upgrade stuff -- OP_SUCCESS and annex things
18:16 <@aj> there's also a few suggestions/PRs along the lines of improving motivation/rationale
18:17 < instagibbs> i found the rationale helped a lot with disambiguating the meaning of the text, especially successx section
18:17 < instagibbs> might mean a slight cleanup warranted
18:21 <@aj> yeah, PRs welcome :)
18:21 < instagibbs> the only thing bothering me really is the definition of codeseparator_position, if we get 4GB+ blocks it is undefined what happens when the marked position is beyond 2^32 :P
18:22 < instagibbs> now that scripts are unbounded in size, only implicitly bounded by blockweight
18:22 <@aj> we already bumped that from 16 bits when the 10k script length limit got dropped
18:28 <@aj> anyway, big blocks would be a hard fork, so if we made it more of a hard fork we could add another spend_type bit to allow for encoding the codesep pos via compactsize (if 64bit numbers are enough for you) or similar
18:28 <@aj> or we could reintroduce a script size limit that's more than 4M but less than 4G
18:31 < instagibbs> yes was not a particularly pressing/serious concern
18:32 <@aj> any more progress with the multisig tree jupyter notebook?
18:33 < instagibbs> no sorry :) it works, dies a combinatoric death at 21-of-30
18:34 < instagibbs> vast majority of the computation is computing the musig pubkeys, someone noted that the tweak could just be the superset of all n signers, might bring down the computation
18:38 <@aj> any thoughts on whether it makes more sense to stay below ~30 signers, or go unaccountable with threshold-musig, or use checksigadd or similar script?
18:39 <@aj> ah, i see there's a magazine article where samson mow talks about having "hundreds" of functionaries
18:41 < instagibbs> there's a scheme for quasi-accountability, but I'd have to defer to andytoshi for that
18:41 -!- HighOnBtc [~Admin@86.121.55.235] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
18:41 -!- HighOnBtc [~Admin@86.121.55.235] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
18:42 <@aj> i guess if you have that many, one approach might be to group them into sets of 5 and allow unaccountable 4/5 musig between them, and do checksigadd to require 18/20 groups to sign or similar for between 72 and 92 of 100 multisig
18:43 <@aj> there's a scheme where the honest participants in the multisig can track who the other co-signers were, so long as you have some honest participants
18:44 < instagibbs> anyways, that's Future Work with threshold
18:46 <@aj> okay, about time for me to put the laptop away, so i guess we'll call it
18:46 <@aj> #endmeeting
18:46 < lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Nov 14 02:46:29 2019 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
18:46 < lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/taproot-bip-review/2019/taproot-bip-review.2019-11-14-02.00.html
18:46 < lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/taproot-bip-review/2019/taproot-bip-review.2019-11-14-02.00.txt
18:46 < lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/taproot-bip-review/2019/taproot-bip-review.2019-11-14-02.00.log.html
18:47 <@aj> might send out a poll to see if there's some other time people would prefer for a second q&a
18:49 -!- HighOnBtc [~Admin@86.121.55.235] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]     
18:55 -!- HighOnBtc [~Admin@86.121.55.235] has joined ##taproot-bip-review     
19:09 -!- HighOnBtc [~Admin@86.121.55.235] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
20:36 -!- soju [uid403160@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ujnbswrsbuznqxph] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]     
21:44 -!- rottensox [~rottensox@unaffiliated/rottensox] has quit [Quit: Bye]