From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
To: slush <slush@centrum•cz>, Alan Reiner <etotheipi@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] SIGHASH_WITHINPUTVALUE
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 09:49:59 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <087FD04D-4DBA-4E93-AA84-FD77AA9FE136@petertodd.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJna-Hi4nUGoOm7ON=jbp-SFVO5-nrMMyNKNV6AYP0hJG_PZdw@mail.gmail.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 23 January 2015 08:35:23 GMT-08:00, slush <slush@centrum•cz> wrote:
>Oh, now I got the 'soft-fork' alternative. If that means that *senders*
>to
>Trezor need to be nice guys and use some special outputs, then it's,
>obviously, no-go solution.
That's what P2SH is for; the senders will just be sending to a P2SH address.
>I understand political aspect around hard-fork. Anyway, are there any
>other
>pending projects waiting for hard-fork?
Hard-forks aren't hard for directly political issues, they're politically hard because they're risky by requiring everyone yo upgrade at once. In the case of signature validation, that touches a *lot* of third party code that people rely on to avoid being defrauded.
FWIW I've actually got a half-finished writeup for how to use OP_CODESEPARATOR and a CHECKSIG2 soft-fork to have signatures sign fees and so forth.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: APG v1.1.1
iQFQBAEBCAA6BQJUwonGMxxQZXRlciBUb2RkIChsb3cgc2VjdXJpdHkga2V5KSA8
cGV0ZUBwZXRlcnRvZGQub3JnPgAKCRAZnIM7qOfwhbwkCADP7AcJ6a6V/y7MHt2x
ZiCXYsfHq5j03kbSWXGi1Q/9RqWGVha1fhWPp62yhDxbWOfh5QKauCbrt2g1AqT3
xbnh+2XE1rApBQIiJ6u0wZmpCi+4EhH2M9R8UYu9oIMzBe4K2jhzUbzcOR9Qplyq
9j6yevNrvtNHZb2OTiaKelxnuZUEiAsONHPOvR8Fkflwbd/w279OeilRjHYt3A/J
U22KOwjNrpa7/QE/HeC0QINqr3S132Yg4iYFwPviBwGq/WXQuLHIzGtgKOzrIC1T
h6kpWO9CjSxVbjMrf68IrSHRv92K8y1LiHFRZvzp3ulzcGBo2btazmrp/fUDLCr0
6uFg
=uDeM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-23 17:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-23 14:51 slush
2015-01-23 15:24 ` Alan Reiner
2015-01-23 15:40 ` slush
2015-01-23 16:05 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-01-23 16:18 ` slush
2015-01-23 16:52 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-01-23 17:40 ` slush
2015-01-23 18:51 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-01-23 19:19 ` slush
2015-01-23 16:23 ` Alan Reiner
2015-01-23 16:27 ` Alan Reiner
2015-01-23 16:33 ` Alan Reiner
2015-01-23 16:35 ` slush
2015-01-23 17:49 ` Peter Todd [this message]
2015-01-23 15:31 ` Tamas Blummer
2015-01-23 15:42 ` Alan Reiner
2015-01-23 15:47 ` slush
2015-01-23 16:08 ` Tamas Blummer
2015-01-23 16:12 ` Adam Back
2015-01-23 16:17 ` Adam Back
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=087FD04D-4DBA-4E93-AA84-FD77AA9FE136@petertodd.org \
--to=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=etotheipi@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=slush@centrum$(echo .)cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox