1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
|
Return-Path: <alex.mizrahi@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9210A94F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 27 Apr 2017 18:41:19 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-qt0-f170.google.com (mail-qt0-f170.google.com
[209.85.216.170])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44AC3136
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 27 Apr 2017 18:41:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qt0-f170.google.com with SMTP id c45so33478097qtb.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 27 Apr 2017 11:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=x/E854JHFMTFl0W9lKE6YIgS4Cw8Zq8CIWjFEmdIQd4=;
b=pUUh2QZwDCGjC4FbauHTDytpf3txritOyo+1cHt98V3hg6OjFDYdK1f1v1iYfjHSI6
DBg3KOGogX1OsgJylPlk1kRJaYWTtOT52aO1dvqktMR9CH8MlS9rr8TXNR0j/r4/I3Be
IKMs6cCo6vgKpmZVzz+syEN7kuzgqrwwArx/CB4velJGEtbsBfbHbmRicUm64aFbiR7W
i7obuRW48YMyVNap2pc9Syn7byri8dRG0qU+SioQoet0Lznsw2y9lNwOGPcunDHv22b0
qlWVvgew5SvYodKl0Cz7CzhieV090sSRNPQzFgYqZULpVeE9TjXfSmQPlEzr/7mlF+n/
BFOw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to;
bh=x/E854JHFMTFl0W9lKE6YIgS4Cw8Zq8CIWjFEmdIQd4=;
b=k+QsFzkiAy9ZW0vrZF+e5qy4GKoEevMuk/nZrIswXPbWJK4Q29gSVYFkA/rIBHyoWN
KmMfGlGLiR/kqmCwr1eRl1rOjdFE4xi/pWo7o4lmtk0BsCu5Keyx4gOcFRLUn+LmxV4d
lC2+mCV/qX1P/TfLVDvXXfR691xeYl77Freslp0wdSXuPNbdmxjVjyIZZtjQJ103U4H3
fUsrsrnUd+oTWHuFF//q7p4dY24Umylmz0F8MUrnLaZVmqo5lH13OnP8YWZFQVelx589
ZGdHcGosVglU0+221hUm5i6i/47kFi+yaxNt4VTSg9pNCG/ipO2AjP9DSg/W3T1T5peo
HRTg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/4WNDxgShcepdVkSyrPX/6l/jRh1sFQNr93ZmGYquVpSlF2Mk6Q
EZ7PK4h0LtIwd4R2U5Ni634iw7xuVqge
X-Received: by 10.200.52.215 with SMTP id x23mr6859507qtb.276.1493318478306;
Thu, 27 Apr 2017 11:41:18 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.55.47.193 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Apr 2017 11:41:17 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CACV3+OU3wT6ZZ+ffUOEXpnmu9p0kf42fEBv3fPxnGPJ88BVwAg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACV3+OU3wT6ZZ+ffUOEXpnmu9p0kf42fEBv3fPxnGPJ88BVwAg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alex Mizrahi <alex.mizrahi@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 21:41:17 +0300
Message-ID: <CAE28kUTQtU17W4xbSgOKvpBWCppoZS1B+iBs_JUAd6nYe=hcgw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11454bd06fa08b054e2a4d50
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Trustless Segwit activation bounty protocol (aka.
bribing the miners)
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: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 18:41:19 -0000
--001a11454bd06fa08b054e2a4d50
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> 2B. If Segwit has not activated at height H, Input 1 of the Bounty Payout
> is not valid since it spends a P2WPKH output, preventing the miner from
> including the Bounty Payout transaction in the block. (However, the output
> of the Segwit Assertion tx can be claimed since it is treated as
> anyone-can-spend, although this is not an issue since it is a very small
> amount).
>
It's a small amount by itself, but miners who are aware of Bounty Payout
Transaction will try to include both these transactions (and both are valid
both on SW and non-SW chains by definition of SW being a soft fork).
If you set timelock of BPT to (H+1) then you sort of discourage this
behavior because a miner of block H might be not the same as miner of block
(H+1), thus he cannot grab this bounty for sure.
Still, there is a chance that same miner will mine both blocks, so
game-theoretically it makes sense to insert SAT into your block since your
expected payoff is positive.
So I'm afraid miners will just grab these bounties regardless of segwit
activation.
--001a11454bd06fa08b054e2a4d50
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>2B. If Segwit has not acti=
vated at height H, Input 1 of the Bounty Payout is not valid since it spend=
s a P2WPKH output, preventing the miner from including the Bounty Payout tr=
ansaction in the block. (However, the output of the Segwit Assertion tx can=
be claimed since it is treated as anyone-can-spend, although this is not a=
n issue since it is a very small amount).</div></div></blockquote><div><br>=
</div><div>It's a small amount by itself, but miners who are aware of B=
ounty Payout Transaction will try to include both these transactions (and b=
oth are valid both on SW and non-SW chains by definition of SW being a soft=
fork).</div><div><br></div><div>If you set timelock of BPT to (H+1) then y=
ou sort of discourage this behavior because a miner of block H might be not=
the same as miner of block (H+1), thus he cannot grab this bounty for sure=
.</div><div><br></div><div>Still, there is a chance that same miner will mi=
ne both blocks, so game-theoretically it makes sense to insert SAT into you=
r block since your expected payoff is positive.</div><div><br></div><div>So=
I'm afraid miners will just grab these bounties regardless of segwit a=
ctivation.</div></div></div></div>
--001a11454bd06fa08b054e2a4d50--
|
