diff options
| author | ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> | 2023-08-31 00:16:25 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2023-08-31 00:17:02 +0000 |
| commit | 29614f8093478cf74520cdfd517290166d440aa8 (patch) | |
| tree | c0a17c701ea6b5160d6154fbba4cbb38cf208365 | |
| parent | c9ada9ba1974522ba0ba285acfefc31b9ae8c1dd (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-29614f8093478cf74520cdfd517290166d440aa8.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-29614f8093478cf74520cdfd517290166d440aa8.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Sentinel Chains: A Novel Two-Way Peg
| -rw-r--r-- | 08/1c96d762bb5912f681a4444093d86b2a32d60b | 145 |
1 files changed, 145 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/08/1c96d762bb5912f681a4444093d86b2a32d60b b/08/1c96d762bb5912f681a4444093d86b2a32d60b new file mode 100644 index 000000000..bb8600831 --- /dev/null +++ b/08/1c96d762bb5912f681a4444093d86b2a32d60b @@ -0,0 +1,145 @@ +Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> +Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::137]) + by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8628CC0032 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 31 Aug 2023 00:17:02 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 660CB41E0D + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 31 Aug 2023 00:17:02 +0000 (UTC) +DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 660CB41E0D +Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; + dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com header.i=@protonmail.com + header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=protonmail3 header.b=GC0bbOyN +X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -1.101 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, + DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, + FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, + URI_NOVOWEL=0.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no +Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id 8hoihOX76mvu + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 31 Aug 2023 00:17:01 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from mail-4327.protonmail.ch (mail-4327.protonmail.ch [185.70.43.27]) + by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09D0B41E03 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 31 Aug 2023 00:17:00 +0000 (UTC) +DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 09D0B41E03 +Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 00:16:25 +0000 +Authentication-Results: mail-4321.protonmail.ch; + dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com header.i=@protonmail.com + header.b="GC0bbOyN" +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; + s=protonmail3; t=1693441008; x=1693700208; + bh=Ph00jjbByPsW/H2QNNvWAJ3qoUgwqEXoHYpoJZlPFuM=; + h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: + Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: + Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; + b=GC0bbOyNm1GPKKG6aL2iDytu9Ab2IUakktcvcBnXBKBkZ5ogxpVhO3B5u2lmQ38aF + E5cKIc4JMOel6iTQ19e5r2vW/CxxkYxcUHG9F6JRAZkFV7OhtP7GeIU5wRshaKqBla + z2ORzftVS9+nNjJKcP671wPMR/MAZ2eF/Q+8qSFA7/PDmX3E0zez2jGA3x00JP0iMQ + 6FywlGwboGrGn8GnOKfoXDk03j7ZxTMDJUghdGreya1qZ4cCEHdMnHK5bdy9KQJtLv + aJCuWX3d9hGrxc68m6Ybde5MKMy/tyyVvxAD8c+EsRTeYElwiOO3r6Rg4AyN0rUjbS + s+JGgGph2RT4Q== +To: ryan@breen.xyz +From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> +Message-ID: <1vNs5QDY6fY_t7bjbY_4gSaYHv0xxDuSkN3eFbW_qM8Q_1-Iwcf3u2AkG7JTQQ__9RxbnhDAI0A5TisV6e1pv_i4hDcj9AVKJZSnLxWu66E=@protonmail.com> +In-Reply-To: <E9WH5C46HJT_uwLTnliTeZSZPrPwoKQs57muUxPVzaGWCWWriC4m2HGVoagR8dfvRBU_1qGtvlhojqIf_854em3_bJIR6DzAqAGHR6fW_nI=@protonmail.com> +References: <E4A37B75-349D-4CD8-B8E2-9686EFDA9EEA@breen.xyz> + <CAPv7TjZf4nLpCZPDOWK=vJGQuH0waTXkM6h40tc7G+YKAOGOGQ@mail.gmail.com> + <2BFA7EE8-2E0E-45A3-AC11-8E57F99EC775@breen.xyz> + <2FylpMx7IsZBt3ILxEt9pVB0Kq03jZqTUeLnB2hWT5j8qiB4o6plW3gjhBXQ_7p4MwQ_npQUpZ64hQaR6UnLhMNCnk_jCv1XObmrJbjrVqg=@protonmail.com> + <0D44C322-E2B4-4F80-A5D8-7D8304BDAE1A@breen.xyz> + <E9WH5C46HJT_uwLTnliTeZSZPrPwoKQs57muUxPVzaGWCWWriC4m2HGVoagR8dfvRBU_1qGtvlhojqIf_854em3_bJIR6DzAqAGHR6fW_nI=@protonmail.com> +Feedback-ID: 2872618:user:proton +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Sentinel Chains: A Novel Two-Way Peg +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 +Precedence: list +List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 00:17:02 -0000 + +Good morning Ryan, et al., + +My long-ago interest in sidechains was the hope that they would be a scalin= +g solution. + +However, at some point I thought "the problem is that blockchains cannot sc= +ale, sidechains means MORE blockchains that cannot scale, what was I thinki= +ng???" +This is why I turned my attention to Lightning, which is a non-blockchain m= +echanism for scaling blockchains. + +The only other reason for sidechains is to develop new features. + +However, any actually useful features should at some point get onto the "re= +al" Bitcoin. +In that case, a sidechain would "only" be useful as a proof-of-concept. +And in that case, a federated sidechain among people who can slap the back = +of the heads of each other in case of bad behavior would be sufficient to d= +evelop and prototype a feature. + +-- + +In any case, if you want to consider a "user-activated" sidechain feature, = +you may be interested in an old idea, "mainstake", by some obscure random w= +ith an unpronouncable name: https://zmnscpxj.github.io/sidechain/mainstake/= +index.html + +Here are some differences compared to e.g. drivechains: + +* Mainchain miners cannot select the builder of the next sidechain block, w= +ithout increasing their required work (possibly dropping them below profita= +bility). + More specifically: + * If they want to select a minority (< 50%) sidechain block builder, then= + their difficulty increases by at least one additional bit. + The number of bits added is basically the negative log2 of the share of= + the sidechain block builder they want to select. + * The intent is to make it very much more unpalatable for a sidechain blo= +ck builder to pay fees to the mainchain miner to get its version of the sid= +echain block confirmed. + A minority sidechain block builder that wants to lie to the mainchain a= +bout a withdrawal will find that the fees necessary to convince a miner to = +select them are much higher than the total fees of a block. + This better isolates sidechain conflicts away from mainchain miners. +* Miners can censor the addition of new mainstakes or the renewal of existi= +ng mainstakes. + However, the same argument of censorship-resistance should still apply he= +re (< 51% cannot reliably censor, and >=3D51% *can* censor but that creates= + an increasing feerate for censored transactions that encourages other pote= +ntial miners to evict the censor). + * In particular, miners cannot censor sidechain blocks easily (part of th= +e isolation above), though they *can* censor new mainstakers that are attem= +pting to evict mainstakers that are hostile to a sidechain. + +There are still some similarities. +Essentially, all sidechain funds are custodied by a set of anonymous people= +. + +One can consider as well that fund distribution is unlikely to be well-dist= +ributed, and thus it is possible that a small number of very large whales c= +an simply take over some sidechain with small mainstakers and outright stea= +l the funds in it, making them even richer. +(Consider how the linked write-up mentions "PoW change" much, much too ofte= +n, I am embarassed for this foolish pseudonymous writer) + +Regards, +ZmnSCPxj + |