Return-Path: <luke@dashjr.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 224142C
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Wed, 14 Dec 2016 11:07:48 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [192.3.11.21])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B66E013E
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Wed, 14 Dec 2016 11:07:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown
	[IPv6:2001:470:5:265:a45d:823b:2d27:961c])
	(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
	by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 93E7A38AB854;
	Wed, 14 Dec 2016 11:07:20 +0000 (UTC)
X-Hashcash: 1:25:161214:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::oZ2+NGYVKTca402m:kDkm
X-Hashcash: 1:25:161214:jl2012@xbt.hk::5Plblz8nv4FEW/nK:+s17
X-Hashcash: 1:25:161214:tomz@freedommail.ch::wPknKJooUQkUR86I:ccFJR
From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
 Johnson Lau <jl2012@xbt.hk>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 11:07:14 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.4.36-gentoo-r1; KDE/4.14.24; x86_64; ; )
References: <FB8593E6-3CD7-46D5-8FC8-A73A0EF1AE9A@xbt.hk>
	<22457494.p1MjVfM24j@cherry>
	<8690A056-F1F9-480A-8C95-E1BF3D8417B2@xbt.hk>
In-Reply-To: <8690A056-F1F9-480A-8C95-E1BF3D8417B2@xbt.hk>
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F
X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F
X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201612141107.16613.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
	autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Forcenet: an experimental network with a new
	header format
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 11:07:48 -0000

On Wednesday, December 14, 2016 11:01:58 AM Johnson Lau via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> There is no reason to use a timestamp beyond 4 bytes.

Actually, there is: lock times... my overflow solution doesn't have a solution 
to that. :x