From: Mats Jerratsch <mats@blockchain.com>
Message-Id: <C9A47922-5777-44AC-871A-6C27A22054AC@blockchain.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
	boundary="Apple-Mail=_44BDD102-B4A4-411E-83C2-315051FE0679";
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2017 16:45:01 +0000
In-Reply-To: <CAAUaCyiZ0bmWZLZc-yDvVHupzbdRR=Kdq4P8VkWqpU1L3G-u3A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jacob Eliosoff <jacob.eliosoff@gmail.com>
References: <7601C2CD-8544-4501-80CE-CAEB402A72D2@blockchain.com>
	<CAAUaCyii2U5VBLS+Va+F3h4Hka0OWDnFFmjtsvyaaD4TKVzV3Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAUaCyiZ0bmWZLZc-yDvVHupzbdRR=Kdq4P8VkWqpU1L3G-u3A@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Generalised Replay Protection for Future Hard
	Forks
Precedence: list


--Apple-Mail=_44BDD102-B4A4-411E-83C2-315051FE0679
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8

Hey Jacob!

> Take the specific and common case of non-upgraded wallet software.  =
Suppose a HF happens, and becomes the network used by 90% of users.  =
Will old wallets still default to the old nForkId (10% legacy chain)?  =
If so, I'd expect a lot of accidental mis-sends on that chain.

With this proposal implemented, a 'mis-send' is fundamentally =
impossible. The address contains the identifier of the token that should =
be sent.

If anything, it's possible to 'mis-receive'.
That is, the receiving wallet was not aware of a newer chain, and the =
receiver actually wanted to receive the newer token, but instead his =
wallet created an address for the old token. It is the responsibility of =
the receiver to write a correct invoice. This is the case everywhere =
else in the world too, so this seems like a reasonable trade-off.

I would even argue that this should hold in a legal case, where the =
receiver cannot claim that he was expecting a payment in another token =
(contrary to how it is today, like when users send BTC to a BCH address, =
losing their funds with potentially no legal right for reimbursement). =
If I sent someone an invoice over 100=E2=82=AC, I cannot later proclaim =
that I actually expected $100.

With this proposal, wallets are finally able to distinguish between =
different tokens. With this ability, I expect to see different =
implementations, some wallets which advertise staying conservative, =
following a strict ruleset, and other wallets being more experimental, =
following hashing rate or other metrics.


--Apple-Mail=_44BDD102-B4A4-411E-83C2-315051FE0679
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
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=jfwy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_44BDD102-B4A4-411E-83C2-315051FE0679--