Hi John,

Thank you for the question. We have discussed this case in the paper, second paragraph of the “Bitcoin PoW Anchoring” Section:

> If a party spends current miner single-use-seal without creating a commitment - or committing to a header without sufficient PoW, such closing is considered invalid; in this case, any party is allowed to create a special bitcoin transaction providing publically-identifiableOP_RETURNinformation ("announcement") about a new miner single-use-seal (protocol reset); only the firstOP_RETURNannouncement which is closed with a proper procedure is considered valid under the consensus rules.

Kind regards,

Maxim Orlovsky

On Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 4:30 PM, John Tromp via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> The white paper describing the proposal can be found here:
> https://github.com/LNP-BP/layer1/

Some questions about the Bitcoin PoW anchoring:

What if a miner spends the current miner single-use-seal while
creating a commitment, but makes the PMT only partially available, or
entirely unavailable ?

How do other miners reach consensus on whether a protocol reset is
required? It seems impossible to agree on something like PMT
availability (much like mempool contents).
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev