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
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
|
Return-Path: <jlspc@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::136])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1183FC0037
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 25 Jan 2024 17:49:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBDF36147B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 25 Jan 2024 17:49:45 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org DBDF36147B
Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org;
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com header.i=@protonmail.com
header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=protonmail3 header.b=RQIGh4sc
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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,
SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id pK-wWVFNusgU
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 25 Jan 2024 17:49:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-0201.mail-europe.com (mail-0201.mail-europe.com
[51.77.79.158])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBD7161475
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 25 Jan 2024 17:49:44 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org DBD7161475
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail3; t=1706204977; x=1706464177;
bh=i7czRvjW8iiQxrjle2sTu/gPWGLKdXG0KLcXV19c4qA=;
h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:
Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:
Message-ID:BIMI-Selector;
b=RQIGh4scdI5W5T0Q+gPrxhagykNX4AiCA8g3/lDBZGaLqkK30ZkdINElI+WexaF13
JNTyrWZ03qboxbF3DQySZf7wwd4auiJUx69WLGa44PN5jqpW/D36GqLJ6L78iuiAf8
bUWEcIG0Yer5B5SiYSwLxJWehOOJ42HzJfUDaK8lTIXklK5x5UoziRudWHM70q86rk
KKvm4Z+Vew2whlcrlUWOcYU6uk9d9ftYlhZS4CyH2bXMMpEV7OferOfjULn1E+lJal
qxkGxv+3/XRL/gLDBCMKMqen2keY4amOdcRJuFFACm0ldFHRJxxa6ENLBNsqW0iGbN
VMdDQ711A7HCg==
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 17:49:26 +0000
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
From: jlspc <jlspc@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <Gr0X5c-3nQcx-VLD3eQ-e0DoOFim5gUKeyOF5ViYPfjE030KB4QJ2tVyA4wfY64Um_zo0fTfjqkTN11-RcvDeiAVhE2_9VYcQ3kSGFD1dug=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ZbFle6n0Zu3yUV8o@petertodd.org>
References: <ZbFle6n0Zu3yUV8o@petertodd.org>
Feedback-ID: 36436663:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 00:56:47 +0000
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] CheckTemplateVerify Does Not Scale Due to UTXO's
Required For Fee Payment
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 25 Jan 2024 17:49:46 -0000
Hi Peter,
If feerate-dependent timelocks (FDTs) (1) are supported, it would be possib=
le to use CTV to define a transaction with a fixed fee and no anchor output=
s, as long as it's racing against a transaction with an FDT.
Regards,
John
(1) https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/2023-December=
/004254.html
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
On Wednesday, January 24th, 2024 at 11:31 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <b=
itcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> CheckTemplateVerify(1) is a proposed covenant opcode that commits to the
> transaction that can spend an output. Namely, # of inputs, # of outputs,
> outputs hash, etc. In practice, in many if not most CTV use-cases intende=
d to
> allow multiple parties to share a single UTXO, it is difficult to impossi=
ble to
> allow for sufficient CTV variants to cover all possible fee-rates. It is
> expected that CTV would be usually used with anchor outputs to pay fees; =
by
> creating an input of the correct size in a separate transaction and inclu=
ding
> it in the CTV-committed transaction; or possibly, via a transaction spons=
or
> soft-fork.
>=20
> This poses a scalability problem: to be genuinely self-sovereign in a pro=
tocol
> with reactive security, such as Lightning, you must be able to get transa=
ctions
> mined within certain deadlines. To do that, you must pay fees. All of the
> intended exogenous fee-payment mechanisms for CTV require users to have a=
t
> least one UTXO of suitable size to pay for those fees.
>=20
> This requirement for all users to have a UTXO to pay fees negates the
> efficiency of CTV-using UTXO sharing schemes, as in an effort to share a =
UTXO,
> CTV requires each user to have an extra UTXO. The only realistic alternat=
ive is
> to use a third party to pay for the UTXO, eg via a LN payment, but at tha=
t
> point it would be more efficient to pay an out-of-band mining fee. That o=
f
> course is highly undesirable from a mining centralization perspective.(2)
>=20
> Recommendations: CTV in its current form be abandoned as design foot-gun.=
Other
> convenant schemes should be designed to work well with replace-by-fee, to=
avoid
> requirements for extra UTXOs, and to maximize on-chain efficiency.
>=20
> 1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/deae64bfd31f6938253c05392aa355bf6=
d7e7605/bip-0119.mediawiki
> 2) https://petertodd.org/2023/v3-transactions-review#anchor-outputs-are-a=
-danger-to-mining-decentralization
>=20
> --
> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
|
