From: Lautaro Dragan <lautarodragan@gmail•com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
Cc: Lautaro Dragan via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Claiming an OP_RETURN Prefix
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2018 21:55:59 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAK6DEsp=1A61kK5K+8xZOX3wSiUhRdVoTm5nUu9dYY3C1CsPnA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F6AA346D-4AF5-4838-A91F-44FAF74A55E9@petertodd.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2009 bytes --]
Thanks Peter for your prompt reply.
And now that I think of it you're right - as easy as it is for us to
differentiate OP_RETURN outputs that contain the Po.et prefix it would be
for miners to block those transactions altogether. Is this what you mean?
Still, a prefix is something we may have to live with for a little while
until we can address that issue.
Is there a formal / standard process to claim it we should follow?
El dom., 5 de ago. de 2018 a la(s) 20:58, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
escribió:
>
>
> On August 5, 2018 9:11:26 PM UTC, Lautaro Dragan via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >Hi everyone,
> >
> >My name's Lautaro and I'm currently acting as Tech Lead of Po.et
> ><https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/OP_RETURN#OP_RETURN_prefixes>. At Po.et we
> >use
> >colored coins
> ><
> https://github.com/poetapp/node/blob/3c905bc5dbd3722ad39ac68041d9f2a099e5e84c/src/BlockchainWriter/ClaimController.ts#L101-L110
> >
> >to
> >store data on the Bitcoin blockchain with prefix "POET".
> >
> >I've read in an old version of the OP_RETURN entry of the bitcoin wiki
> ><https://en.bitcoin.it/w/index.php?title=OP_RETURN&oldid=62560> that
> >*protocols
> >wishing to claim OP_RETURN prefixes should use the standard Bitcoin
> >Improvement Proposals process*.
> >
> >That entry seems to have changed recently
> ><https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/OP_RETURN#OP_RETURN_prefixes>, no longer
> >stating that we should follow the BIP process, and I haven't been able
> >to
> >find any existing BIP claiming an OP_RETURN prexif, but for the sake of
> >thoroughness I'd like to ask for your help or confirmation here.
> >
> >Should we actually be using the BIP process to claim a prefix?
>
> It's better if you don't use a prefix at all from a censorship resistance
> and anonymity perspective; you're application should not require a prefix
> for technical reasons.
>
> --
> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3275 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-06 0:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-05 21:11 Lautaro Dragan
2018-08-05 23:57 ` Peter Todd
2018-08-06 0:55 ` Lautaro Dragan [this message]
2018-08-06 1:54 ` CryptAxe
2018-08-06 2:04 ` Luke Dashjr
2018-08-06 2:19 ` Lautaro Dragan
2018-08-14 18:34 Christopher Allen
2018-08-15 20:33 ` Jorge Timón
2018-08-15 20:40 ` Jude Nelson
2018-08-15 21:54 ` Christopher Allen
2018-08-16 1:06 ` Luke Dashjr
2018-08-16 2:22 ` Lautaro Dragan
2018-08-16 2:37 ` Luke Dashjr
2018-08-16 17:32 ` Ryan Grant
2018-08-15 21:46 ` Peter Todd
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='CAK6DEsp=1A61kK5K+8xZOX3wSiUhRdVoTm5nUu9dYY3C1CsPnA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=lautarodragan@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=lautaro.dragan@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=pete@petertodd$(echo .)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