diff options
| author | Christopher Gilliard <christopher.gilliard@gmail.com> | 2021-04-20 10:12:35 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2021-04-20 17:12:51 +0000 |
| commit | a44022f9d62e37c2039ce0009abdbc33ca736f82 (patch) | |
| tree | 69dcf949abc0023dfb8fa2b7fa8f7dbc5cca8dd4 | |
| parent | 0470955464d07805de968bc9b1a3a896b80d83e0 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-a44022f9d62e37c2039ce0009abdbc33ca736f82.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-a44022f9d62e37c2039ce0009abdbc33ca736f82.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - limiting OP_RETURN / HF
| -rw-r--r-- | 86/6c6ab563dfde3e198200e063a92cc855769f7a | 209 |
1 files changed, 209 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/86/6c6ab563dfde3e198200e063a92cc855769f7a b/86/6c6ab563dfde3e198200e063a92cc855769f7a new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7752b66e8 --- /dev/null +++ b/86/6c6ab563dfde3e198200e063a92cc855769f7a @@ -0,0 +1,209 @@ +Return-Path: <christopher.gilliard@gmail.com> +Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::133]) + by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C8CBC000B + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:12:51 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48E0B401F5 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:12:51 +0000 (UTC) +X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -2.099 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, + HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] + autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no +Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); + dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com +Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id 8D7z_XmMf6KL + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:12:47 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 +Received: from mail-ot1-x332.google.com (mail-ot1-x332.google.com + [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::332]) + by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3382E40254 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:12:47 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by mail-ot1-x332.google.com with SMTP id + 5-20020a9d09050000b029029432d8d8c5so10498974otp.11 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 20 Apr 2021 10:12:47 -0700 (PDT) +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; + h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to + :cc; bh=dJ/rp+8BtMkhsFVnGto7TBB6z9umbHAu+3Hi710pIjY=; + b=k9VDj5FTHKMWpTv4klnu+rQ73gD9gu4OYs13/mC/DJL7Lr0BnuOatbKEqhUQdMF7/i + 8vh9zyaDM2ZVMorb9hjFVazG7hF6CxR0IP14mLOd8Y84z1mpf0dvKMDicsM7GhEaPUQx + OeRBqnk4qopxcCMszVoLvbJEqVa8ezsNnTvXpUh2UVDu0yGKRMbD3n0ZoI/yaEl0I/Gu + /VBx9wyRdCADTbdaeNW2X/0ZclUDhMojjZcEsjpoztDqcgRqV+n0jL/PmhXpPh5IzX1S + A88npnCXl83N6VodXbClx8rTIT2ZKMGECF3TivzeYtamZMRTT7AaHrvlEi7RatmKHZ1l + 4v0A== +X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=1e100.net; s=20161025; + h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date + :message-id:subject:to:cc; + bh=dJ/rp+8BtMkhsFVnGto7TBB6z9umbHAu+3Hi710pIjY=; + b=PZlBnpGZBKVTlkHr9otwww+DtsFfySVMLkTN9SUZSBEP9bczPyMGEkOH0ny5mXCith + YrswiZcWbbRS6UDyzkm9qMZaffPfNOOOOo4qDF4dyVd7OuWEBU3PJ+6EgE8P340+EyD0 + a5UriqxeT70IEMdZPjakW/m8SkAdzg7hEUwIZ0TmJKXJvSCR5A52fdwUjL3R6xI2ovrl + J96ZJ5UpmPw4lzwW/gOtSdv6ZQ/D+5Y9IWHU+GHPzvIlRnD8Q2T5O/eQFxPgwsTv3Mua + Vq4K0usd4NDoovwICq9bfFrgIS9xjrhyPMO79yW56tgV2P+k9krvPBWrrdCTKVRIpFXh + J17Q== +X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533HUAOqQs8q6wAY0W3tQCJ27TTW4xX0xGW/OKhc6estiOG6Bvt+ + K/ESfLENIh1gLuYTthzQJKgDXHibXgriHz35yo4= +X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwEyQ1vRd7fiHEesWODUfTMtQOM/Qv5j1TPfaXHPB15a5WC2kDsr8nJ5n6JRdsUVQcN5yMjj0gZ6Qzyixlt6WE= +X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:14cd:: with SMTP id + t13mr19982721otq.74.1618938766302; + Tue, 20 Apr 2021 10:12:46 -0700 (PDT) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +References: <CAK=nyAxOa8fsVfxucH7WTTMn25BCzgQ28h_sNsunedpCoRXjjQ@mail.gmail.com> + <CABE6yHscUPAcyK58DvqhOnxSOoPMBAy9aMUmReJYSkBit-Mekg@mail.gmail.com> + <CAPv7Tja=4ZFm5+gHw+wMcZyPEqeQiVx-AjyXsRn0T8a+tXHb1A@mail.gmail.com> + <050674b8bc51cff11e0a6e105880b647@cock.li> + <CAJ4-pEDEsQCqT9Yiz6WiWahPV5kkxc89XbsDydgEPuoZRU8MvQ@mail.gmail.com> +In-Reply-To: <CAJ4-pEDEsQCqT9Yiz6WiWahPV5kkxc89XbsDydgEPuoZRU8MvQ@mail.gmail.com> +From: Christopher Gilliard <christopher.gilliard@gmail.com> +Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 10:12:35 -0700 +Message-ID: <CAK=nyAxmNc087YPwxr-3i9J1zm+1+VWMy_u1a=Rcc1spdZBHKw@mail.gmail.com> +To: Zach Greenwood <zachgrw@gmail.com> +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000141fad05c06a8e5b" +X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 18:23:21 +0000 +Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - limiting OP_RETURN / HF +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: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:12:51 -0000 + +--000000000000141fad05c06a8e5b +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" + +Zach, + +Thanks for the comments. I just sent out another email to the dev alias +with the other two BIPs that I mentioned last week. It is pending approval +now. I think it will talk about some of the things you mentioned. To avoid +having a lot of comments about those BIPs on this thread, let's use the new +thread for discussing those BIPs. + +--Chris + +On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 1:45 AM Zach Greenwood <zachgrw@gmail.com> wrote: + +> [Note: this is my first post to the list] +> +> Businesses storing data on-chain is undesirable but sadly unavoidable. +> Therefore one might as well *facilitate* data storage beyond just OP_RETURN +> by offering a more efficient way to store data on-chain, while still being +> almost as expensive in use per byte of payload (i.e., data) compared to +> using OP_RETURN. +> +> Storing data using OP_RETURN is still inefficient per byte of payload so a +> more efficient dedicated data storing facility might be created that stores +> more payload data per on-chain byte. Such a facility should be (marginally) +> cheaper to use per payload byte compared to using a hack such as OP_RETURN. +> This would encourage the use of this facility in favor of OP_RETURN or +> other hacks, while at the same time dramatically reducing the footprint of +> storing data on-chain. +> +> Zac +> +> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 4:29 AM yanmaani--- via bitcoin-dev < +> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: +> +>> > If only one hash is allowed per block, then those who wish to utilize +>> > the hash will have to out-bid each other ("fee-bidding"). This hash can +>> > then be used to create another chain ("merged-mining") +>> +>> Merged mining at present only needs one hash for a merkle root, and +>> that's stored in the coinbase. It would be even simpler to add the +>> following rules: +>> +>> 1) No OP_RETURN transactions allowed at all +>> 2) If you want to commit data, do so in that one transaction in the +>> coinbase +>> +>> Also curious about how you'd handle the payment - do I need to put in a +>> transaction that burns bitcoins for the tx fee? That isn't free in terms +>> of storage either. +>> _______________________________________________ +>> bitcoin-dev mailing list +>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev +>> +> + +--000000000000141fad05c06a8e5b +Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +<div dir=3D"ltr">Zach,<div><br></div><div>Thanks for the comments. I just s= +ent out another email to the dev alias with the other two BIPs that I menti= +oned last week. It is pending approval now. I think it will talk about some= + of the things you mentioned. To avoid having a lot of comments about those= + BIPs on this thread, let's use the new thread for discussing those BIP= +s.</div><div><br></div><div>--Chris</div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quot= +e"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 1:45 AM Za= +ch Greenwood <<a href=3D"mailto:zachgrw@gmail.com">zachgrw@gmail.com</a>= +> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px = +0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div= + dir=3D"ltr">[Note: this is my first post to the list]<div><br></div><div>B= +usinesses storing data on-chain is undesirable but sadly unavoidable. There= +fore one might as well *facilitate* data storage beyond just OP_RETURN by o= +ffering a more efficient way to store data on-chain, while still being almo= +st as expensive in use per byte of payload (i.e., data) compared to using O= +P_RETURN.</div><div><br></div><div>Storing data using OP_RETURN is still in= +efficient per byte of payload so a more efficient dedicated data storing fa= +cility might be created that stores more payload data per on-chain byte. Su= +ch a facility should be (marginally) cheaper to use per payload byte compar= +ed to using a hack such as OP_RETURN. This would encourage the use of this = +facility in favor of OP_RETURN or other hacks, while at the same time drama= +tically reducing the footprint of storing data on-chain.</div><div><br></di= +v><div>Zac</div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class= +=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 4:29 AM yanmaani--- via bitcoin-dev= + <<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_bl= +ank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockqu= +ote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px= + solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">> If only one hash is allowed = +per block, then those who wish to utilize <br> +> the hash will have to out-bid each other ("fee-bidding"). Th= +is hash can <br> +> then be used to create another chain ("merged-mining")<br> +<br> +Merged mining at present only needs one hash for a merkle root, and <br> +that's stored in the coinbase. It would be even simpler to add the <br> +following rules:<br> +<br> +1) No OP_RETURN transactions allowed at all<br> +2) If you want to commit data, do so in that one transaction in the <br> +coinbase<br> +<br> +Also curious about how you'd handle the payment - do I need to put in a= + <br> +transaction that burns bitcoins for the tx fee? That isn't free in term= +s <br> +of storage either.<br> +_______________________________________________<br> +bitcoin-dev mailing list<br> +<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">= +bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br> +<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" = +rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail= +man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br> +</blockquote></div> +</blockquote></div> + +--000000000000141fad05c06a8e5b-- + |