Return-Path: Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0524CC002D for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2022 22:12:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0783417A0 for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2022 22:12:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org C0783417A0 Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com header.i=@protonmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=protonmail3 header.b=Hw18JmI2 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.102 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.102 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YCeh-XaH7JrR for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2022 22:12:23 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 94D0F4179D Received: from mail-4325.protonmail.ch (mail-4325.protonmail.ch [185.70.43.25]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94D0F4179D for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2022 22:12:23 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2022 22:12:13 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1670969540; x=1671228740; bh=tlUfQP0VZ7LefhOOSFnIssZAkGsjuKyA2eHi+Hcf34U=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date: Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=Hw18JmI2e4Efm0JsjP2CwoA/8ldxbEqLno6WKjBHtViVcGubkD/LBqxGYHGcJmia9 lAcTxiCZ5PyudMUaLZaHno4kELsTPTZGdfJ7wDeI2TjrrWswK6/2sytqDuM+VHcdHQ jA1TxdEiyoPQzWeFbyNiNnW0wahK8yjHLJOR2uv/pGBWGnljAStpr/7ZOmmswm/QI+ UPXnLPxn8Z3OzoYTvF5MJ9Hw2flCJKSky6dfhvK0KWTW2tlo2nkeGpV0FnXd6Fj7U7 DjI64a0vsGYUyIe9ygIAqGgrReau4YxGATjpn+/vSYrSDSrrykrNRBJ2Br1pXA1CFk b2kEdTMwQczhw== To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion From: alicexbt Message-ID: Feedback-ID: 40602938:user:proton MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 13 Dec 2022 23:18:08 +0000 Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Use of OP_CTV in p2p exchanges that use 2of3 multisig X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2022 22:12:25 -0000 Hi Bitcoin Developers, Problem: In p2p exchanges that use 2of3 multisig (example: hodlhodl[0]), th= ere is a possibility of buyer and seller settling the trade without involvi= ng exchange. Lets consider Alice (buyer), Bob (seller) and Carol (exchange)= . Once bitcoin is locked in multisig, Alice and Bob could create and sign a= transaction which does not include trading fees output that goes to exchan= ge. Solution: I was wondering if OP_CTV fixes this because we could use a=C2= =A0template that specifies the release transaction must have two outputs: o= ne output that sends small amount to the exchange for fees, and another out= put that sends bitcoin to the buyer. I am not good at writing bitcoin script with opcodes so did not test this h= owever I wanted to confirm with others if this makes sense and can there be= other advantages of using OP_CTV for a p2p exchange. If this setup is considered a vault maybe [simple vault[1] which uses 2of2 = multisig can be modified for proof of concept or a [normal poc][2] if there= are RPC commands available to test OP_CTV in bitcoin-inquistion. [0]: https://gitlab.com/hodlhodl-public/public_docs/blob/master/multisig_sp= ec.md [1]: https://github.com/jamesob/simple-ctv-vault [2]: https://github.com/1440000bytes/p2p /dev/fd0 Sent with Proton Mail secure email.