From: Greg Sanders <gsanders87@gmail•com>
To: KING JAMES HRMH <willtech@live•com.au>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Relaxing minimum non-witness transaction size policy restriction
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 09:14:54 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAB3F3Dv9bY3uf-21wDW43s_xU=Xjg7s2MzXReoBxwTVVHgenjw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <PS2P216MB1089C3131115B700C840BEFB9D239@PS2P216MB1089.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2118 bytes --]
Propagation of these kinds of transactions will be hampered until <merge
version in core> becomes 10%+ of the network or so, like any other policy
relaxation.
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 9:08 AM KING JAMES HRMH <willtech@live•com.au>
wrote:
> I am reading between the lines, wouldn't that mean an older client like
> v0.18 may not be able to receive a transaction from a newer client if it
> has to validate 85 non-witness serialized bytes? If so we should not
> concern but retain the backward compatibility especially since this was for
> a vulnerability? I have not checked to code to see what it does.
>
> KING JAMES HRMH
>
> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev-bounces@lists•linuxfoundation.org> on
> behalf of Greg Sanders via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 11, 2022 11:50:07 PM
> *To:* Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
> *Subject:* [bitcoin-dev] Relaxing minimum non-witness transaction size
> policy restriction
>
> Hello fellow Bitcoiners,
>
> After looking at some fairly exotic possible transaction types, I ran into
> the current policy limit requiring transactions to be 85 non-witness
> serialized bytes. This was introduced as a covert fix to policy fix
> for CVE-2017-12842. Later the real motivation was revealed, but the
> "reasonable" constant chosen was not.
>
> I'd like to propose relaxing this to effectively the value BlueMatt
> proposed in the Great Consensus Cleanup: 65 non-witness bytes. This would
> allow a single input, single output transaction with 4 bytes of OP_RETURN
> padding, rather than padding out 21 bytes to get to p2wpkh size.
>
> The alternative would be to also allow anything below 64 non-witness
> bytes, but this seems fraught with footguns for a few bytes gain.
>
> The PR is here with more relevant background and alternatives included in
> the thread:
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26265
>
> Please let us know if there's a fundamental issue with this approach, or
> any other feedback.
>
> Best,
> Greg
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3527 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-11 13:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-11 12:50 Greg Sanders
[not found] ` <PS2P216MB1089C3131115B700C840BEFB9D239@PS2P216MB1089.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
2022-10-11 13:14 ` Greg Sanders [this message]
2022-10-20 23:21 ` Peter Todd
2022-10-21 0:07 ` Greg Sanders
2022-10-21 0:13 ` Peter Todd
2022-10-26 19:09 ` Greg Sanders
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='CAB3F3Dv9bY3uf-21wDW43s_xU=Xjg7s2MzXReoBxwTVVHgenjw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=gsanders87@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=willtech@live$(echo .)com.au \
/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