From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr•org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fw: Quote on BIP 16
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 09:40:01 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201201290940.02464.luke@dashjr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T2A8f64mh2-uSKwrjj9aEo0Z=jHyETQ5J9cka9JwyJqJw@mail.gmail.com>
On Sunday, January 29, 2012 9:30:10 AM Gavin Andresen wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 6:19 AM, Amir Taaki <zgenjix@yahoo•com> wrote:
> > (oops sorry greg- replied to you by mistake)
> >
> > That address he gives is 77 characters/bytes (same thing). What I'm
> > asking is how can it be so small.
>
> That's an alternative design for multisig addresses that would put a byte
> giving the type of transaction and the 20-byte hashes of each of the public
> keys involved. They would not have been redeemed using CHECKMULTISIG, but
> would use DUP HASH160 CHECKSIG and the arithmetic or logical opcodes to
> create the "m of n" condition.
>
> Nobody really liked that solution because it means a new 'type' of bitcoin
> address every time we want a new transaction type and long addresses.
>
> Its only advantage is it didn't use CHECKMULTISIG, so there were no
> problems with maximum-sigops-per-block.
In other words, if the max-sigops-per-block were ever approaching a real
problem, we could just start using these kind of transactions instead hidden
behind the P2SH... so the one remotely-tangible benefit of BIP 16 over 17 has
been solved, right? ;)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-29 14:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-29 4:52 [Bitcoin-development] " Amir Taaki
2012-01-29 5:10 ` Amir Taaki
2012-01-29 5:15 ` Luke-Jr
2012-01-29 5:23 ` Alan Reiner
2012-01-29 8:14 ` Gregory Maxwell
2012-01-29 5:19 ` Gregory Maxwell
[not found] ` <1327835941.47827.YahooMailNeo@web121006.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
2012-01-29 11:19 ` [Bitcoin-development] Fw: " Amir Taaki
2012-01-29 14:30 ` Gavin Andresen
2012-01-29 14:40 ` Luke-Jr [this message]
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=201201290940.02464.luke@dashjr.org \
--to=luke@dashjr$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
/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