From: Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach•org>
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [RFC] Canonical input and output ordering in transactions
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2015 19:47:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOG=w-tJjzrR_REJOShULfSO=T3ueHko-oQHdhqMCdZD0G_BDA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgTY5cqwj5XuKtkD8Z8N1vF=PZMba8EtGkbWnEackOcN8Q@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1578 bytes --]
There's another important use case which you mentioned Greg, that also
requires special exemption: compact commitments via mid-state compression.
The use case is an OP_RETURN output sorted last, whose last N bytes are a
commitment of some kind. A proof of the commitment can then use mid state
compression to elide the beginning of the transaction.
How do you make a special exemption for this category of outputs? I can't
think of a very clean way of doing so that doesn't require an ugly
advertising of sort-order exemptions.
The fact that we have two different existing use cases which conflict with
soft-fork enforcement, I'm quiet concerned that there are either other
things we aren't thinking of or haven't invented yet which would be
affected.
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail•com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 2:29 AM, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp•com.au>
> wrote:
> > The softfork argument I find the most compelling, though it's tempting
> > to argue that every ordering use (including SIGHASH_SINGLE) is likely
> > a mistake.
>
> Oh.
>
> Hm.
>
> It is the case that the generalized sighash flag design I was thinking
> about was actually completely neutral about ordering, and yet still
> replaced SINGLE.
>
> I need to think a bit on that.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2305 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-15 2:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-06 4:42 Rusty Russell
2015-06-06 4:46 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-06-06 6:44 ` Rusty Russell
2015-06-06 8:24 ` Wladimir J. van der Laan
2015-06-06 9:45 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-06-08 21:25 ` Danny Thorpe
2015-06-08 21:36 ` Peter Todd
2015-06-14 23:04 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-06-14 23:02 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-06-15 2:29 ` Rusty Russell
2015-06-15 2:33 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-06-15 2:47 ` Mark Friedenbach [this message]
2015-06-15 21:01 ` Rusty Russell
2015-06-16 7:10 ` Jorge Timón
2015-06-16 8:06 ` Rusty Russell
[not found] ` <CABm2gDpkwHvrsB8Dh-hsO6H9trcweEX9XGB5Jh5KLPsPY5Z1Sw@mail.gmail.com>
2015-06-21 7:27 ` [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: " Jorge Timón
2015-06-15 4:01 ` [Bitcoin-development] " Kristov Atlas
2015-06-24 22:09 ` [bitcoin-dev] " Kristov Atlas
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='CAOG=w-tJjzrR_REJOShULfSO=T3ueHko-oQHdhqMCdZD0G_BDA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=mark@friedenbach$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=gmaxwell@gmail$(echo .)com \
/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