Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WPZtG-0001Hd-5K for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 15:55:50 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.217.176 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.217.176; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-lb0-f176.google.com; Received: from mail-lb0-f176.google.com ([209.85.217.176]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WPZtE-0004Py-6j for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 15:55:50 +0000 Received: by mail-lb0-f176.google.com with SMTP id 10so3743309lbg.21 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 08:55:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.235.229 with SMTP id up5mr374968lbc.62.1395071741443; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 08:55:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.184.226 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 08:55:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140316225819.GA19846@netbook.cypherspace.org> References: <20130519132359.GA12366@netbook.cypherspace.org> <5199C3DE.901@gmail.com> <20131014180807.GA32082@netbook.cypherspace.org> <20140316225819.GA19846@netbook.cypherspace.org> Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 08:55:41 -0700 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: Adam Back Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) 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 (gmaxwell[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 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: 1WPZtE-0004Py-6j Cc: Bitcoin-Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 2-way pegging (Re: is there a way to do bitcoin-staging?) X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 15:55:50 -0000 On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Adam Back wrote: > 2. you move coins to the side-chain by spending them to a fancy script, > which suspends them, and allows them to be reanimated by the production o= f > an SPV proof of burn on the side-chain. One point to note here is that the if the whole move and quieting period stuff sounds cumbersome=E2=80=94 thats because it is. Even with the best efficiency opti= mizations the security requirements result in somewhat large and slow transactions=E2=80= =94 and thats totally fine! A key point here is that normally someone who needs to use coins on one cha= in or the other can use fast atomic cross-chain transactions[1][2] and not bother with the slow direct movement across. The cross chain swapping, however, requires an (untrusted) counterparty on the other chain, while the 2-way peg migrations= can be performed alone in order to provide liquidity and balance demand. [1] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Contracts#Example_5:_Trading_across_chains (Hm the citation there is weird, that predates TierNolan's post) [2] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D321228.0 CoinSwap: Transaction graph disjoint trustless trading (private version)