Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com
	designates 209.85.214.181 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.214.181; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com;
	helo=mail-ob0-f181.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <ce3968063ee51172883eb88dcb7a9bba@riseup.net>
References: <20150619103959.GA32315@savin.petertodd.org>
	<04CE3756-B032-464C-8FBD-7ACDD1A3197D@gmail.com>
	<812d8353e66637ec182da31bc0a9aac1@riseup.net>
	<1727885.UUNByX4Jyd@crushinator>
	<15ea02cb53046dbe363d5d4876becb6d@riseup.net>
	<CAJHLa0PXrtVAo4g2HnqzU+nYK_Eo6waUvryZ9-pbDdvU5LOyNQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<ce3968063ee51172883eb88dcb7a9bba@riseup.net>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 10:50:15 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJHLa0Ne9TxXwKRE0x2xoX9TUZV3WNPNbM3noXrDvFg-0zJ3vg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Justus Ranvier <justusranvier@riseup.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113cea26b005f90518e28f8a
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] F2Pool has enabled full replace-by-fee
Precedence: list

--001a113cea26b005f90518e28f8a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 10:48 AM, <justusranvier@riseup.net> wrote:

> On 2015-06-19 17:40, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
>> Making multiple incompatible versions of a spend is a -requirement- of
>> various refund contract protocols.
>>
>
> Is there not a dedicated field in a transaction (nSequence) for express
> purpose of indicating when a protocol like this is in use?
>

No.  You cannot know which is the 'right' or wrong transaction.  One tx has
obvious nSequence adjustments, the other - the refund transaction - may not.

-- 
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc.      https://bitpay.com/

--001a113cea26b005f90518e28f8a
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 10:48 AM,  <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<=
a href=3D"mailto:justusranvier@riseup.net" target=3D"_blank">justusranvier@=
riseup.net</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=
=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8=
ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">On 2015-06=
-19 17:40, Jeff Garzik wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Making multiple incompatible versions of a spend is a -requirement- of<br>
various refund contract protocols.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
Is there not a dedicated field in a transaction (nSequence) for express pur=
pose of indicating when a protocol like this is in use?<br></blockquote><di=
v><br></div><div>No.=C2=A0 You cannot know which is the &#39;right&#39; or =
wrong transaction.=C2=A0 One tx has obvious nSequence adjustments, the othe=
r - the refund transaction - may not.</div></div><div><br></div>-- <br><div=
 class=3D"gmail_signature">Jeff Garzik<br>Bitcoin core developer and open s=
ource evangelist<br>BitPay, Inc. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<a href=3D"https://bit=
pay.com/" target=3D"_blank">https://bitpay.com/</a></div>
</div></div>

--001a113cea26b005f90518e28f8a--