From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail•com>
To: Andreas Petersson <andreas@petersson•at>
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] On OP_RETURN in upcoming 0.9 release
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 15:13:28 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgT6qFHBojoB-teCjF_YAd9TePdQ3+NWnO0dwf9Bv583_Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <530BD076.3020606@petersson.at>
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Andreas Petersson <andreas@petersson•at> wrote:
> Regarding 80 bytes vs smaller: The objectives should be that if you are
> determined to put some extra data in the blockchain, OP_RETURN should be
> the superior alternative. if a user can include more data with less fees
> using a multisig TX, then this will happen.
>
> eventually dust-limit rules will not be the deciding factor here, since
> i suspect block propagation times will have a stronger effect on
> effective fees. therefore a slightly larger payload than the biggest
> multisig TX is the right answer. - that would be >= 64x3 bytes = 192 bytes.
> (this is my understanding of how large a 3-of-3 multisig tx can be, plus
> 1.5 bits encoded in the "n" parameter)
At least there is no ambiguity that such usage is abusive. Adoption of
the practices matters too. Right now I've seen a lot of people
promoting data storage as a virtuous use, and gearing up to directly
store data when a commitment would work.
If it turns out that encouraging people to use hashes is a lost cause
it can always be further relaxed in the future, going the other way is
much harder.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-24 23:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-24 16:03 Jeff Garzik
2014-02-24 16:16 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-02-24 16:32 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-02-24 16:33 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-02-24 16:39 ` Wladimir
2014-02-24 16:45 ` Gavin Andresen
2014-02-24 16:50 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-02-24 17:23 ` Mark Friedenbach
2014-02-24 23:06 ` Andreas Petersson
2014-02-24 23:13 ` Gregory Maxwell [this message]
2014-02-24 23:13 ` Luke-Jr
2014-02-28 5:25 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2014-02-28 14:42 ` Warren Togami Jr.
2014-02-28 19:25 ` Mark Friedenbach
2014-02-28 19:36 ` Justus Ranvier
2014-02-28 20:10 ` Drak
2014-02-24 17:10 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-02-24 22:12 ` Jeremy Spilman
2014-02-24 22:50 ` Jeff Garzik
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=CAAS2fgT6qFHBojoB-teCjF_YAd9TePdQ3+NWnO0dwf9Bv583_Q@mail.gmail.com \
--to=gmaxwell@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=andreas@petersson$(echo .)at \
--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