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
|
Return-Path: <vjudeu@gazeta.pl>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87172C000B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 4 Mar 2022 13:43:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62D6740305
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 4 Mar 2022 13:43:49 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gazeta.pl
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 E6sSZaD5vOSF
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 4 Mar 2022 13:43:48 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from smtpo107.poczta.onet.pl (smtpo107.poczta.onet.pl
[213.180.149.160])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D9A1402F9
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 4 Mar 2022 13:43:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pmq4v.m5r2.onet (pmq4v.m5r2.onet [10.174.32.70])
by smtp.poczta.onet.pl (Onet) with ESMTP id 4K98Fm2mM5z1srH;
Fri, 4 Mar 2022 14:43:40 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gazeta.pl; s=2013;
t=1646401420; bh=colgvHZLh4m2D9Ayw5ysVmIq65tSI0vgQGD4ZSrQuns=;
h=From:Cc:To:In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:From;
b=CzkbvAwRkcg7Wovya0ujpUD/CUB3Ipt1amp2jlih9AbfEplksPtzdS0UL10nVnxfk
0hG/GqHmGwgNj/yNFmgsQq2IVeAxts8D5FzBvjil9Tc63dVQhF59DMquhqU1lLjbvh
G4IiT+PjB2Oe1C2rD7j/8srSUODBDb7P0g7B/O3k=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Received: from [82.177.167.2] by pmq4v.m5r2.onet via HTTP id ;
Fri, 04 Mar 2022 14:43:40 +0100
From: vjudeu@gazeta.pl
X-Priority: 3
To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <HLa5I3wJJu9SEQ2UD69HYFY1pwaIzvK1iQzdTggBVZkLHEdaXcp1UbLFiSMJOxcSZqr-EKYb7Irtxa7kI830XJamCqSy4jJ8WynGPqZ-xoM=@protonmail.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2022 14:43:40 +0100
Message-Id: <158184081-a1d5b424942fc47a0a6665ca7ba04258@pmq4v.m5r2.onet>
X-Mailer: onet.poczta
X-Onet-PMQ: <vjudeu@gazeta.pl>;82.177.167.2;PL;3
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 04 Mar 2022 15:19:57 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Recursive covenant opposition,
or the absence thereof,
was Re: TXHASH + CHECKSIGFROMSTACKVERIFY in lieu of CTV and ANYPREVOUT
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: Fri, 04 Mar 2022 13:43:49 -0000
> The Taproot address itself has to take up 32 bytes onchain, so this saves=
nothing.
There is always at least one address, because you have a coinbase transacti=
on and a solo miner or mining pool that is getting the whole reward. So, in=
stead of using separate OP_RETURN's for each sidechain, for each federation=
, and for every "commitment to the blockchain", all we need is just tweakin=
g that miner's key and placing everything inside unused TapScript. Then, we=
don't need separate 32 bytes for this and separate 32 bytes for that, we o=
nly need a commitment and a MAST-based path that can link such commitment t=
o the address of this miner.
So, instead of having:
<coinbasePubkey>
<opReturn1>
<opReturn2>
...
<opReturnN>
We could have:
<tweakedCoinbasePubkey>
On 2022-03-04 09:42:23 user ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> wrote:
> Good morning vjudeu,
> > Continuous operation of the sidechain then implies a constant stream of=
32-byte commitments, whereas continuous operation of a channel factory, in=
the absence of membership set changes, has 0 bytes per block being publish=
ed.
>
> The sidechain can push zero bytes on-chain, just by placing a sidechain h=
ash in OP_RETURN inside TapScript. Then, every sidechain node can check tha=
t "this sidechain hash is connected with this Taproot address", without pus=
hing 32 bytes on-chain.
The Taproot address itself has to take up 32 bytes onchain, so this saves n=
othing.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
