From: Ariel Lorenzo-Luaces <arielluaces@gmail•com>
To: Praveen Baratam <praveen.baratam@gmail•com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Why SegWit Anyway?
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 09:39:11 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3cf690cf-5918-4779-b4f0-a05f7ca5cc93@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAQs3wuDPktHc6kiZXqTaatOheX4KP=TRgje0_-ED5h8iNs-MA@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1566 bytes --]
Hello Praveen
You're absolutely right. We could refer to transactions by the hash that gets signed.
However the way that bitcoin transactions reference each other has already been established to be hash of transaction+signature. Changing this would require a hard fork.
Segwit is the realization that this could be done as a soft fork if we simply extract the signature outside of what the old client considers a transaction. And into a new transaction format where we do exactly what you're describing.
In my opinion the way it originally worked with the sig inside the transaction was simply an oversight by satoshi. No different than a bug.
Cheers
Ariel Lorenzo-Luaces
On Nov 20, 2017, 9:29 AM, at 9:29 AM, Praveen Baratam via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>Bitcoin Noob here. Please forgive my ignorance.
>
From what I understand, in SegWit, the transaction needs to be
>serialized
>into a data structure that is different from the current one where
>signatures are separated from the rest of the transaction data.
>
>Why change the format at all? Why cant we just compute the Transaction
>ID
>the same way the hash for signing the transaction is computed?
>
>--
>Dr. Praveen Baratam
>
>about.me <http://about.me/praveen.baratam>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>bitcoin-dev mailing list
>bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
>https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2903 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-20 17:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-20 17:24 Praveen Baratam
2017-11-20 17:39 ` Ariel Lorenzo-Luaces [this message]
2017-11-20 17:45 ` Johnson Lau
[not found] ` <CAAUFj10ZRQrtEzB_2wp-WS8Q-FGcSegpc_Z6kqvqnDLzNn=DrA@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAAUFj11_Vh2K4MrmuBre5KaX6F16Jg3PYAsj6SSfzoYYRz_WyA@mail.gmail.com>
2017-11-20 18:04 ` Dan Bryant
2017-11-21 13:10 ` Steve Shadders
2017-11-21 13:16 ` Adán Sánchez de Pedro Crespo
2017-11-25 15:41 ` CANNON
2017-11-20 18:07 ` Praveen Baratam
2017-11-20 19:58 ` Johnson Lau
2017-11-20 18:59 ` Gregory Maxwell
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=3cf690cf-5918-4779-b4f0-a05f7ca5cc93@gmail.com \
--to=arielluaces@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=praveen.baratam@gmail$(echo .)com \
/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