diff options
| author | Jorge Timón <jtimon@jtimon.cc> | 2015-07-26 00:05:28 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-07-25 22:05:30 +0000 |
| commit | 4c5384a55045b8d4794c44c1241f1923b899421c (patch) | |
| tree | 8025032617d2adf55a74e22f271dfef1387b6074 | |
| parent | 63d59527635650c0b7b092502de35fa5877784cd (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-4c5384a55045b8d4794c44c1241f1923b899421c.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-4c5384a55045b8d4794c44c1241f1923b899421c.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Draft: Minimum Viable TXIn Hash
| -rw-r--r-- | 85/33bf46ea671e399880f9cf50e85885864795ec | 99 |
1 files changed, 99 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/85/33bf46ea671e399880f9cf50e85885864795ec b/85/33bf46ea671e399880f9cf50e85885864795ec new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9af44a7ea --- /dev/null +++ b/85/33bf46ea671e399880f9cf50e85885864795ec @@ -0,0 +1,99 @@ +Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B7E53EE + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Sat, 25 Jul 2015 22:05:30 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com (mail-wi0-f170.google.com + [209.85.212.170]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4F03DE + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Sat, 25 Jul 2015 22:05:29 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by wicmv11 with SMTP id mv11so98268683wic.0 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Sat, 25 Jul 2015 15:05:28 -0700 (PDT) +X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=1e100.net; s=20130820; + h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date + :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; + bh=imVCzOS1O3SsTGo38c83/zfbsWR1JVONsx7ki8ARQCg=; + b=Vhg2ChVHOaFwCek/aKQGoivqrH7QppEktXEGMYKu/8WHIUFxrg8icZgnwBXo43Lnf7 + jRYUHtGKySBtuGJ+wPTcueXvf2PQ2VZpkKEcFx8IxMmkURepFTsFAz4fXIMwrtQl4hJs + JDr0RMY74ckPMil4uS4MUH//kN6ssfOProumb6TZfSAkgNi4VamUDePEeaA9q0DrDJKQ + NNI92nVYflOzDw/aSpqTgtK5mfibngVNyK1T+RUrJ6N6GO/O+W8GNA4NP8T5KXNY6R2z + yYVIhAwysopygWSlFtIG6qgCJTIk5ysKv0JIPVhZGSFbnsmbNh9bpgo95O6sqrnO4+T4 + QLPg== +X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkblT+aGyLh6Rx2yNoo9Vu1y2xIcJ/taiFXnimAm20qVF5enQusEeKgPE4m3crUVxWDGeKk +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Received: by 10.194.187.170 with SMTP id ft10mr39672516wjc.26.1437861928295; + Sat, 25 Jul 2015 15:05:28 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.194.95.168 with HTTP; Sat, 25 Jul 2015 15:05:28 -0700 (PDT) +In-Reply-To: <201507251951.53970.luke@dashjr.org> +References: <CAJ+8mENU5kQuKg=-UAh05qGEPS1OuiKTgXFVGcF0Z0gsRo+Czw@mail.gmail.com> + <201507251951.53970.luke@dashjr.org> +Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2015 00:05:28 +0200 +Message-ID: <CABm2gDrCzYTo7hYB7EaVoDUq5bhD9TmMO=uGLn3H33Bz8J8ppg@mail.gmail.com> +From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc> +To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW + autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on + smtp1.linux-foundation.org +Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Draft: Minimum Viable TXIn Hash +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 +Precedence: list +List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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: Sat, 25 Jul 2015 22:05:30 -0000 + +From your draft: + +"It could also more easily, ignoring the difficulties of a hard-fork +period, be rolled out as a hard fork to avoid hokey-pokey.[1] +[...] + +[1] Because someone asked... The Txid Hokey Pokey: you put the tail +end in, you put the tail end out, you put the tail end in and you hash +it all about you do the hokey pokey and you solve the block difficulty +bound, that's what it's all about!" + +Reading this, the first thing that comes to mind is "What the h#$% is +a hokey pokey?" + +From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hokey_cokey : "It is well known in +English-speaking countries.". +That explains why I haven't heard about it in my whole life. +It may things clearer for people in these countries, but at least to +me, it just makes things more complicated: the analogy (that I still +don't understand after skimming the wikipedia article) doesn't allow +me to understand the actual explanation. + +Can you please rewrite that with a more culturally-neutral analogy (or +just no analogy and just leave the explanation)? + +On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 9:51 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev +<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: +> On Thursday, July 23, 2015 8:12:19 PM Jeremy Rubin via bitcoin-dev wrote: +> +> This looks like just a p2p protocol optimisation, which doesn't even need a +> softfork. You do need to document the suggested protocol changes more +> specifically, however. + +I think his goal is to make it a consensus change so that confirmed +transactions can also use less space in blocks. +But, yes, I don't think it gives you anything to enforce it as a +consensus rule (all you care about is the savings when transmitting +the transactions and blocks). +In fact, I'm not sure how would that work, would the "compact tx" +produce a different hash than the non-compact one? + |