From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail•com>
To: Greg Sanders <gsanders87@gmail•com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] More uses for CTV
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2022 03:03:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <h7uL5jH1cnGVVpA7k_F0O7aHQALl2ICqAlISd2gdvf3XKQiSjTFlEvIqqysvyhmQ3O52HbVoox2WZYTyjZDaWfTdvRx3Ef4YJVqty5MEaXI=@protonmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAB3F3DvMMjfV0eS4DvEzXdKLNa+549-ctLNHON8JQBzxWjKD-A@mail.gmail.com>
Good morning Greg,
> Hi James,
> Could you elaborate on a L2 contract where speedy
> settlement of the "first part" can be done, while having the rest
> take their time? I'm more thinking about time-out based protocols.
>
> Naturally my mind drifts to LN, where getting the proper commitment
> transaction confirmed in a timely fashion is required to get the proper
> balances back. The one hitch is that for HTLCs you still need speedy
> resolution otherwise theft can occur. And given today's "layered
> commitment" style transaction where HTLCs are decoupled from
> the balance output timeouts, I'm not sure this can save much.
As I understand it, layered commitments can be modified to use `OP_CTV`, which would be slightly smaller (need only to reveal a 32-byte `OP_CTV` hash on the witness instead of a 64-byte Taproot signature, or 73-byte classical pre-Taproot ECDSA signature), and is in fact precisely an example of the speedy settlement style.
> CTV style commitments have popped up in a couple places in my
> work on eltoo(emulated via APO sig-in-script), but mostly in the
> context of reducing interactivity in protocols, not in byte savings per se.
In many offchain cases, all channel participants would agree to some pre-determined set of UTXOs, which would be implemented as a transaction spending some single UTXO and outputting the pre-determined set of UTXOs.
The single UTXO can be an n-of-n of all participants, so that all agree by contributing their signatures:
* Assuming Taproot, the output address itself is 33 bytes (x4 weight).
* The n-of-n multisignature is 64 witness bytes (x1 weight).
Alternatly the single UTXO can be a P2WSH that reveals an `OP_CTV`:
* The P2WSH is 33 bytes (x4 weight) --- no savings here.
* The revelation of the `<hash> OP_CTV` is 33 witness bytes (x1 weight).
Thus, as I understand it, `OP_CTV` can (almost?) always translate to a small weight reduction for such "everyone agrees to this set of UTXOs" for all offchain protocols that would require it.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-20 3:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-19 16:33 James O'Beirne
2022-08-19 17:20 ` Greg Sanders
2022-08-20 3:03 ` ZmnSCPxj [this message]
2022-08-19 18:53 ` David A. Harding
2022-08-19 21:01 ` Jeremy Rubin
2022-09-19 1:22 ` Antoine Riard
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='h7uL5jH1cnGVVpA7k_F0O7aHQALl2ICqAlISd2gdvf3XKQiSjTFlEvIqqysvyhmQ3O52HbVoox2WZYTyjZDaWfTdvRx3Ef4YJVqty5MEaXI=@protonmail.com' \
--to=zmnscpxj@protonmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=gsanders87@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