From: Tier Nolan <tier.nolan@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP-draft] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - An opcode for relative locktime
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 23:36:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAE-z3OVFiiDmjVTnFZPTQEbRQK69ZiVkHwXrJ4QS211JeTb9=w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOG=w-to4Vrx4ykKJTy5EAyN4GZd6Q=G5FzqZH-5J3Thz_VNpQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1144 bytes --]
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Mark Friedenbach via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Assuming a maximum of 1-year relative lock-times. But what is an
> appropriate maximum to choose? The use cases I have considered have only
> had lock times on the order of a few days to a month or so. However I would
> feel uncomfortable going less than a year for a hard maximum, and am having
> trouble thinking of any use case that would require more than a year of
> lock-time. Can anyone else think of a use case that requires >1yr relative
> lock-time?
>
>
The main advantage of relative locktime over absolute locktime is in
situations when it is not possible to determine when the clock should
start. This inherently means lower delays.
As a workaround, you could chain transactions to extend the relative
locktime.
Transaction B has to be 360 days after transaction A and then transaction C
has to be 360 days after transaction B and C must be an input into the
final transaction.
The chain could be built up with multi-sig, like the refund transaction
system, so no one person can create an alternative chain.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1574 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-25 22:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-13 11:06 Btc Drak
2015-08-13 18:12 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-13 19:20 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-08-13 23:42 ` Joseph Poon
2015-08-14 0:47 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-14 18:53 ` Matt Corallo
2015-08-14 21:29 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-14 22:24 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-17 19:58 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-19 10:37 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-19 16:21 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-19 21:27 ` Joseph Poon
2015-08-19 21:32 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-20 21:23 ` Peter Todd
2015-08-24 0:25 ` Tom Harding
2015-08-24 1:01 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-08-24 2:23 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-24 2:37 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-25 22:08 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-25 22:36 ` Tier Nolan [this message]
2015-08-27 23:32 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-09-16 22:40 ` Btc Drak
2015-09-16 23:23 ` Eric Lombrozo
2015-09-17 4:23 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-09-18 1:21 ` Rusty Russell
2015-09-17 7:43 ` jl2012
2015-08-24 2:40 ` jl2012
2015-08-24 2:54 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-24 7:00 ` jl2012
2015-08-25 10:15 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-27 3:08 ` Rusty Russell
2015-08-27 11:03 ` David A. Harding
2015-08-27 12:29 ` jl2012
2015-08-30 21:33 ` Rusty Russell
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='CAE-z3OVFiiDmjVTnFZPTQEbRQK69ZiVkHwXrJ4QS211JeTb9=w@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=tier.nolan@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
/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