MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAK=nyAxOa8fsVfxucH7WTTMn25BCzgQ28h_sNsunedpCoRXjjQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABE6yHscUPAcyK58DvqhOnxSOoPMBAy9aMUmReJYSkBit-Mekg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABE6yHscUPAcyK58DvqhOnxSOoPMBAy9aMUmReJYSkBit-Mekg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christopher Gilliard <christopher.gilliard@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 20:12:07 +0000
Message-ID: <CAK=nyAxfAY7Ob64XR+5E6uSv+0BcUsuVZUzNbNZBcUnRf1XY9Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kostas Karasavvas <kkarasavvas@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c2dd7405c01c987e"
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - limiting OP_RETURN / HF
Precedence: list

--000000000000c2dd7405c01c987e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Thanks for the feedback. Will update the 40 bytes to 80 bytes (40 bytes was
the previous value, but it has since been updated to 80 so that's correct).
Regarding the L2 proposal. I think the BIPs I am working on will address
your questions and I'm hoping to have two more out early next week so
please stay tuned. I'm open to merging those BIPs into this BIP or
vice-versa, but for the sake of making things more readable I broke them
down into several BIPs for the time being.

On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 7:15 PM Kostas Karasavvas <kkarasavvas@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Christopher,
>
> Some feedback:
>
> "OP_RETURN is limited to 40 bytes of data."
> It is 80 bytes.
>
> "A future BIP proposing such a layer two protocol will be forthcoming."
> So what is this BIP about? Just saying that it would be a nice idea? This
> BIP should be the one that would go through this L2 suggestion. If one root
> OP_RETURN substitutes all the rest it should say how that would be done...
> where would the merkle proofs be stored, what are the trust
> assumptions that we need to make, etc.
>
> "Objections to this proposal" section
> I agree with others re hard-fork, which would be a good thing of course.
> My main objection with this proposal is that I don't see a proposal. It
> seems like wishful thinking... if only we could substitute all the
> OP_RETURNs with one :-)
>
> We have to make sure that a proposal like this (L2, etc.) would make sure
> that there are incentives that justify the added complexity for the users.
> Multisig is not the only way data could be stored the wrong way; P2PK,
> P2PKH, P2SH, P2WPKH, P2WSH can also be used. If the incentives are not good
> enough people would start using these UTXO-bloat-heavy alternatives.
>
> There are a multitude of L2's (kind-of) that do this 'aggregation' of data
> hashes using merkle trees. Factom is adding a single merkle root per
> bitcoin block for the millions upon millions of records (of thousand of
> users) that they keep in their network. Opentimestamps, tierion,
> blockstacks and others do a similar thing. I have investigated several of
> those in the past, for one of my projects, but I ended up using plain old
> OP_RETURN because the overhead of their (L2-like) solution and trust
> assumptions where not to my liking; at least for my use case. They were
> pretty solid/useful for other use cases.
>
> Unless the proposed L2 is flexible/generic enough it would really prohibit
> this L2 innovation that OP_RETURN allowed (see above).
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 4:32 PM Christopher Gilliard via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> I have created a BIP which can be found here:
>> https://github.com/cgilliard/bips/blob/notarization/bip-XXXX.mediawiki
>>
>> I'm sending this email to start the discussion regarding this proposal.
>> If there are any comments/suggestions, please let me know.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Chris
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>
>
> --
> Konstantinos A. Karasavvas
> Software Architect, Blockchain Engineer, Researcher, Educator
> https://twitter.com/kkarasavvas
>

--000000000000c2dd7405c01c987e
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Thanks for the feedback. Will update the 40 bytes to 80 by=
tes (40 bytes was the previous value, but it has since been updated to 80 s=
o that&#39;s correct). Regarding the L2 proposal. I think=C2=A0the=C2=A0BIP=
s I am working on will address your questions and I&#39;m hoping to have tw=
o more out early next week so please stay tuned. I&#39;m open to merging th=
ose BIPs into this BIP or vice-versa, but for the sake of making things mor=
e readable I broke them down into several BIPs for the time being.</div><br=
><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, A=
pr 16, 2021 at 7:15 PM Kostas Karasavvas &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:kkarasavvas@=
gmail.com">kkarasavvas@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rg=
b(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">Hi Christopher,<div><br><=
/div><div>Some feedback:</div><div><br></div><div>&quot;OP_RETURN is limite=
d to 40 bytes of data.&quot;</div><div>It is 80 bytes.</div><div><br></div>=
<div>&quot;A future BIP proposing such a layer two protocol will be forthco=
ming.&quot;</div><div>So what is this BIP about? Just saying that it would =
be a nice idea? This BIP should be the one that would go through this L2 su=
ggestion. If one root OP_RETURN substitutes all the rest it should say how =
that would be done... where would the merkle proofs be stored, what are the=
 trust assumptions=C2=A0that we need to make, etc.</div><div><br></div><div=
>&quot;Objections to this proposal&quot; section</div><div>I agree with oth=
ers re hard-fork, which would be a good thing of course.=C2=A0 My main obje=
ction with this proposal is that I don&#39;t see a proposal. It seems like =
wishful thinking... if only we could substitute all the OP_RETURNs with one=
 :-)</div><div><br></div><div>We have to make sure that a proposal like thi=
s (L2, etc.) would make sure that there are incentives that justify the add=
ed complexity for the users. Multisig is not the only way data could be sto=
red the wrong way; P2PK, P2PKH, P2SH, P2WPKH, P2WSH can also be used. If th=
e incentives are not good enough people would start using these UTXO-bloat-=
heavy alternatives.</div><div><br></div><div>There are a multitude of L2=
9;s (kind-of) that do this &#39;aggregation&#39; of data hashes using merkl=
e trees. Factom is adding a single=C2=A0merkle root per bitcoin block for t=
he millions upon millions of records (of thousand of users) that they keep =
in their network. Opentimestamps, tierion, blockstacks and others do a simi=
lar thing. I have investigated several of those in the past, for one of my =
projects, but I ended up using plain old OP_RETURN because the overhead of =
their (L2-like) solution and trust assumptions where not to my liking; at l=
east for my use case. They were pretty solid/useful for other use cases.</d=
iv><div><br></div><div>Unless the proposed L2 is flexible/generic enough it=
 would really prohibit this L2 innovation that OP_RETURN allowed (see above=
).=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_q=
uote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 4:32 PM=
 Christopher Gilliard via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lis=
ts.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation=
.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"mar=
gin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1=
ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">I have created a BIP which can be found here:=C2=A0<a =
href=3D"https://github.com/cgilliard/bips/blob/notarization/bip-XXXX.mediaw=
iki" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/cgilliard/bips/blob/notarization/=
bip-XXXX.mediawiki</a><div><br></div><div>I&#39;m sending this email to sta=
rt the discussion regarding this proposal. If there are any comments/sugges=
tions, please let me know.</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Chri=
s</div></div>
_______________________________________________<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><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir=3D"ltr"=
><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div>Konstantinos A. Karasavvas</div><div>Software A=
rchitect, Blockchain Engineer, Researcher, Educator</div><div dir=3D"ltr"><=
a href=3D"https://twitter.com/kkarasavvas" target=3D"_blank">https://twitte=
r.com/kkarasavvas</a><br></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div>

--000000000000c2dd7405c01c987e--