diff options
| author | Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> | 2015-05-27 12:11:26 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-05-27 10:11:33 +0000 |
| commit | 67fb4387961539f606b5e33b312472fb0f5a5a21 (patch) | |
| tree | cf9f101bb3156d2a55355472f9ed2409c0167a1d | |
| parent | 013cee50546c4c666185af7ba9a52915bc7c0169 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-67fb4387961539f606b5e33b312472fb0f5a5a21.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-67fb4387961539f606b5e33b312472fb0f5a5a21.zip | |
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Consensus-enforced transaction replacement via sequence numbers
| -rw-r--r-- | 26/852a605b21e23a981170b0d2383baa0ca1b6b4 | 124 |
1 files changed, 124 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/26/852a605b21e23a981170b0d2383baa0ca1b6b4 b/26/852a605b21e23a981170b0d2383baa0ca1b6b4 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..4129b2ae4 --- /dev/null +++ b/26/852a605b21e23a981170b0d2383baa0ca1b6b4 @@ -0,0 +1,124 @@ +Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] + helo=mx.sourceforge.net) + by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) + (envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1YxYJB-0006GR-IO + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Wed, 27 May 2015 10:11:33 +0000 +Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com + designates 209.85.212.178 as permitted sender) + client-ip=209.85.212.178; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; + helo=mail-wi0-f178.google.com; +Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com ([209.85.212.178]) + by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) + (Exim 4.76) id 1YxYJA-0001Bh-E0 + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Wed, 27 May 2015 10:11:33 +0000 +Received: by wicmc15 with SMTP id mc15so88830122wic.1 + for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; + Wed, 27 May 2015 03:11:26 -0700 (PDT) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Received: by 10.194.9.161 with SMTP id a1mr58097137wjb.39.1432721486453; + Wed, 27 May 2015 03:11:26 -0700 (PDT) +Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com +Received: by 10.194.143.9 with HTTP; Wed, 27 May 2015 03:11:26 -0700 (PDT) +In-Reply-To: <CAOG=w-sfiUQQGUh=RR55NU-TkAi1+2g3_Z+YP3dGDjp8zXYBGQ@mail.gmail.com> +References: <CAOG=w-sfiUQQGUh=RR55NU-TkAi1+2g3_Z+YP3dGDjp8zXYBGQ@mail.gmail.com> +Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 12:11:26 +0200 +X-Google-Sender-Auth: YPUBf6Z8JP5H1ZKmK1ixO64Zdkk +Message-ID: <CANEZrP0QMHp9PwBr=ekkujtA+=LXbgiL4xkXRSmcOGqaLJEp0g@mail.gmail.com> +From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> +To: Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org> +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d34fa4324d705170d7716 +X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) +X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. + See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. + -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for + sender-domain + 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider + (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) + -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record + 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message + 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, + not necessarily valid + -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature +X-Headers-End: 1YxYJA-0001Bh-E0 +Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> +Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Consensus-enforced transaction + replacement via sequence numbers +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 +Precedence: list +List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 10:11:33 -0000 + +--047d7b5d34fa4324d705170d7716 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 + +> +> Sequence numbers appear to have been originally intended as a mechanism +> for transaction replacement within the context of multi-party transaction +> construction, e.g. a micropayment channel. +> + +Yes indeed they were. Satoshis mechanism was more general than micropayment +channels and could do HFT between any set of parties. + + +> As it happens, this cannot be made safe in the bitcoin protocol as +> deployed today, as there is no enforcement of the rule that miners include +> the most recent transaction in their blocks. +> + +Safe is relative - this is the same logic the original replace-by-fee +argument uses. There's no enforcement that miners use any particular +ordering of transactions. + +As I believe out of all proposed protocols Satoshi's is still the most +powerful, I would suggest that any change to the semantics on nSequence be +gated by a high bit or something, so the original meaning remains available +if/when resource scheduling and update flood damping are implemented. That +way people can try it out and if miners are breaking things too frequently +by ignoring the chronological ordering people can abandon protocols that +rely on it, and if they aren't they can proceed and benefit from the +greater flexibility. + +--047d7b5d34fa4324d705170d7716 +Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo= +ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left= +-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;paddi= +ng-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">Sequence numbers appear to have been original= +ly intended as a mechanism for transaction replacement within the context o= +f multi-party transaction construction, e.g. a micropayment channel. </div>= +</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes indeed they were. Satoshis mechanism w= +as more general than micropayment channels and could do HFT between any set= + of parties.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style= +=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(20= +4,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">As it= + happens, this cannot be made safe in the bitcoin protocol as deployed toda= +y, as there is no enforcement of the rule that miners include the most rece= +nt transaction in their blocks.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>S= +afe is relative - this is the same logic the original replace-by-fee argume= +nt uses. There's no enforcement that miners use any particular ordering= + of transactions.</div><div><br></div><div>As I believe out of all proposed= + protocols Satoshi's is still the most powerful, I would suggest that a= +ny change to the semantics on nSequence be gated by a high bit or something= +, so the original meaning remains available if/when resource scheduling and= + update flood damping are implemented. That way people can try it out and i= +f miners are breaking things too frequently by ignoring the chronological o= +rdering people can abandon protocols that rely on it, and if they aren'= +t they can proceed and benefit from the greater flexibility.</div><div><br>= +</div></div></div></div> + +--047d7b5d34fa4324d705170d7716-- + + |