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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gavinandresen@gmail.com>) id 1WxFLt-0003uu-5G
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:52:33 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.160.176 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.160.176; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com;
helo=mail-yk0-f176.google.com;
Received: from mail-yk0-f176.google.com ([209.85.160.176])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WxFLr-0004Lq-CC
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:52:33 +0000
Received: by mail-yk0-f176.google.com with SMTP id 131so520509ykp.21
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Wed, 18 Jun 2014 05:52:22 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.236.172.161 with SMTP id t21mr23573993yhl.65.1403095942298;
Wed, 18 Jun 2014 05:52:22 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: gavinandresen@gmail.com
Received: by 10.170.223.70 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 05:52:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20140618001503.GA8360@savin>
References: <CABsx9T2+_tLOPELm+K54D=6SNkHg1ZeO_T1jSM=CQZYJKGODFw@mail.gmail.com>
<20140618001503.GA8360@savin>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:52:22 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: E122nB8ZM0Yig7UrzdrajZohez0
Message-ID: <CABsx9T2O42pER0b1v9oeU14_K=KVWVqHzcfFmWAhSxoYAn12vg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavin@bitcoinfoundation.org>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf304273e03a045e04fc1bbb79
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(gavinandresen[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1WxFLr-0004Lq-CC
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: relax the IsStandard rules for
P2SH transactions
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:52:33 -0000
--20cf304273e03a045e04fc1bbb79
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
RE: most of Peter Todd's comments:
All of that should be separate pull requests. Big Honking Pull Requests
are harder to review and are more likely to be bike-shedded to death.
RE: not relaying/mining transactions with OP_NOPs so miners don't mine
up-version transactions that are invalid under future-new-rules: I'm not
convinced it is worth adding more code (more potential for bugs) to protect
against something that isn't going to happen because up-version
transactions are non-standard (due to version check) in any case.
In any case, lets make that a separate pull request.
I'm going to take the lack of immediate "That's a Terrible Idea!" as rough
consensus...
--
--
Gavin Andresen
Chief Scientist, Bitcoin Foundation
https://www.bitcoinfoundation.org/
--20cf304273e03a045e04fc1bbb79
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">RE: most of Peter Todd's comments:<div><br></div><div>=
All of that should be separate pull requests. =C2=A0Big Honking Pull Reques=
ts are harder to review and are more likely to be bike-shedded to death.</d=
iv><div>
<br></div><div><br></div><div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">RE: not relaying/m=
ining transactions with OP_NOPs so miners don't mine up-version transac=
tions that are invalid under future-new-rules: I'm not convinced it is =
worth adding more code (more potential for bugs) to protect against somethi=
ng that isn't going to happen because up-version transactions are non-s=
tandard (due to version check) in any case.</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">In any case=
, lets make that a separate pull request.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><=
br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">I'm going to take the lack of immed=
iate "That's a Terrible Idea!" as rough consensus...<br clear=
=3D"all">
<div><br></div>-- <br>--<div>Gavin Andresen</div><div>Chief Scientist, Bitc=
oin Foundation</div><div><a href=3D"https://www.bitcoinfoundation.org/" tar=
get=3D"_blank">https://www.bitcoinfoundation.org/</a></div><div><br></div>
</div></div></div>
--20cf304273e03a045e04fc1bbb79--
|
