From: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail•com>
To: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP16/17 replacement
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 14:14:08 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201202011414.12221.andyparkins@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201201311651.02726.andyparkins@gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1611 bytes --]
On 2012 January 31 Tuesday, Andy Parkins wrote:
> - Increase the version number in transactions to make a new transaction
> structure
> - Dump the "scriptPubKey" field completely. Everything will be pay-to-
> script-hash in version2 transactions
> - Replace it with "hashOfClaimingScript"
> - Add an "unsignedParameters" array.
Having thought about it; I've realised that the above is simply BIP16 without
the backward compatibility work in it. If BIP16 renamed the scriptPubKey
field to "hashOfClaimingScript" and no longer ran it as a script, it woudl be
close to identical. We'd simply define the field as
0xa9 0x14 <hashOfClaimingScript> 0x87
Detection of this format of scriptPubKey activates "version2" processing of
the transaction. And similarly, a new definition of scriptSig to be two
fields:
unsignedInitialStackBlock
scriptClaim
I'm sure nobody cares about my opinion; but that's actually been the moment
of epiphany for me (and I raise it here, in case it is for someone else).
Having previously been against BIP16, I'm now happy with BIP16 -- it's a
progression towards the ideal... having a literal claimScriptHash field
instead of scriptPubKey; and never running scriptPubKey.
Potentially OP_CHECKSIG could be simplified as well because the rules could
be "anything that's not the serialized script" in scriptSig is not signed.
I can imagine one day, when the network is all BIP16 compliant, that
scriptPubKey will no longer be allowed to run as script at all.
Andy
--
Dr Andy Parkins
andyparkins@gmail•com
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-01 14:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-31 16:50 Andy Parkins
2012-01-31 16:58 ` Luke-Jr
2012-01-31 17:11 ` Andy Parkins
2012-02-01 9:48 ` Andy Parkins
2012-02-01 10:02 ` Pieter Wuille
2012-02-01 10:25 ` Andy Parkins
2012-01-31 17:45 ` Gregory Maxwell
2012-02-01 9:46 ` Andy Parkins
2012-02-01 14:14 ` Andy Parkins [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=201202011414.12221.andyparkins@gmail.com \
--to=andyparkins@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(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