From: Steve Shadders <shadders.del@gmail•com>
To: DKBryant@gmail•com,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Why SegWit Anyway?
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 23:10:28 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOPxoMtPvKm0t1ih8vw5YmiGUYjR5Y5a8ZLvjaKo06mH+iHjoA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAUFj1091C3xXL+2j1EovE2j_2kDYsjP_O4ZOKBaxmHuKN=1Lg@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2683 bytes --]
There is incentive because of artificially distorted block weight rules. It
is favourable for a miner to choose a segwit tx over a non segwit tx as
they can fit more of them into a block and earn more fees.
On Nov 21, 2017 11:06 PM, "Dan Bryant via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Is there any incentive for miners to pick segwit transactions over
> non-segwit transaction. Do they require less, equal, or more compute to
> process?
>
> On Nov 20, 2017 11:46 AM, "Johnson Lau via bitcoin-dev" <
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> We can’t “just compute the Transaction ID the same way the hash for
> signing the transaction is computed” because with different SIGHASH flags,
> there are 6 (actually 256) ways to hash a transaction.
>
> Also, changing the definition of TxID is a hardfork change, i.e. everyone
> are required to upgrade or a chain split will happen.
>
> It is possible to use “normalised TxID” (BIP140) to fix malleability
> issue. As a softfork, BIP140 doesn’t change the definition of TxID.
> Instead, the normalised txid (i.e. txid with scriptSig removed) is used
> when making signature. Comparing with segwit (BIP141), BIP140 does not have
> the side-effect of block size increase, and doesn’t provide any incentive
> to control the size of UTXO set. Also, BIP140 makes the UTXO set
> permanently bigger, as the database needs to store both txid and normalised
> txid
>
> On 21 Nov 2017, at 1:24 AM, Praveen Baratam via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Bitcoin Noob here. Please forgive my ignorance.
>
> From what I understand, in SegWit, the transaction needs to be serialized
> into a data structure that is different from the current one where
> signatures are separated from the rest of the transaction data.
>
> Why change the format at all? Why cant we just compute the Transaction ID
> the same way the hash for signing the transaction is computed?
>
> --
> Dr. Praveen Baratam
>
> about.me <http://about.me/praveen.baratam>
> _______________________________________________
>
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5285 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-21 13:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-20 17:24 Praveen Baratam
2017-11-20 17:39 ` Ariel Lorenzo-Luaces
2017-11-20 17:45 ` Johnson Lau
[not found] ` <CAAUFj10ZRQrtEzB_2wp-WS8Q-FGcSegpc_Z6kqvqnDLzNn=DrA@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAAUFj11_Vh2K4MrmuBre5KaX6F16Jg3PYAsj6SSfzoYYRz_WyA@mail.gmail.com>
2017-11-20 18:04 ` Dan Bryant
2017-11-21 13:10 ` Steve Shadders [this message]
2017-11-21 13:16 ` Adán Sánchez de Pedro Crespo
2017-11-25 15:41 ` CANNON
2017-11-20 18:07 ` Praveen Baratam
2017-11-20 19:58 ` Johnson Lau
2017-11-20 18:59 ` Gregory Maxwell
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=CAOPxoMtPvKm0t1ih8vw5YmiGUYjR5Y5a8ZLvjaKo06mH+iHjoA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=shadders.del@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=DKBryant@gmail$(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