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
|
Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B2C689E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 9 Sep 2017 21:12:00 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-io0-f180.google.com (mail-io0-f180.google.com
[209.85.223.180])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 696F9140
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 9 Sep 2017 21:11:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-io0-f180.google.com with SMTP id d16so11532652ioj.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 09 Sep 2017 14:11:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=jtimon-cc.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=yczuPSqGHi7T1En47213slzaS68KvDW0dZLtmqUfFb4=;
b=A+D2PF6VPhA5A3yWWHcQu93q2rqr5DkBq8O0FIQb7mGc6gzHuQnq56/QvY6YlJ08j2
dVkmOnziw2vcjSTn+FcMhYquT4vl0Tj9qbeW0gynefqWPCQ0/55OEuixzMPy4L+gIQni
xk5gTygDp49ZUfdypPgZgKiGci8yZam6L93eL2nZ/rChxRrylILD1sfoEl/otM+lOEv9
GLJi8PHohdKELl67c0hVN9I2jB+kPOESH9vDrC0KAhivOCuF1MitwqLn35GKolUmMBvh
KxkW9R2b/TYogrVUUeQVgWtZKoCnw9g388D11glWNQkJWfSPh27b3FzRfgNPPb/IemLP
O7Ow==
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:cc:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=yczuPSqGHi7T1En47213slzaS68KvDW0dZLtmqUfFb4=;
b=noS86fXW/VRsbOl6mD6U90jVeJKMxx9Z2xjnXw2ZRpjvXtFWTKfnUBDP9ECbB5S197
Ur3yDfSfIFesLeEVgdH8f7INwTyMrnwrLF3pGGV2LQZvqoofDNZ2ft1lj/XGMqF+ypAK
whecIV/pmJfHlZ7nv1kGE2toMS76m2gwEHGx3MAMaajUdY2t7SKotnrK4R7SE9ae9r6k
MdNlxEm/zGW+D8iz/bNOUB3Y/+6dGU8rRbTuJ+Eak/O3vrjSs9x52VNrOuZNq+SmO+Tz
Vm9pVg6cD4GwaFz6zS4UXucLS4qV8h22CUzwDbdahKZsK7e2YmtA6abruGcn52yhwcPk
lu0Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUiL5l3y9+mxhJNu4prC/gAUvJsuUVBFn/r8gbdKevNrqX88uVLt
swclIygWklnNUHHCgmjAizfx2mO0FIat
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QBW8cwUQpUFFWTWjUl0z3U8Z7GpZYEAsjONCZkJgr5MURfOWEdo2AN3qIHYDejs55DzDkvf6FqMHyOoSYIZcg0=
X-Received: by 10.107.5.194 with SMTP id 185mr9672940iof.98.1504991518623;
Sat, 09 Sep 2017 14:11:58 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.2.80.129 with HTTP; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 14:11:57 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20170907180014.GA13727@fedora-23-dvm>
References: <CABm2gDojDQWMhw8wW1UkRGKtdbby2+6AFFZLPuRcUb7WF_u5qQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20170907180014.GA13727@fedora-23-dvm>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 23:11:57 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDpy3a0vc+4=0a2vFSQ2d1gaAWFkPtzdbXLpNKYFepDU3A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.5 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] SF proposal: prohibit unspendable outputs with
amount=0
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: Sat, 09 Sep 2017 21:12:00 -0000
Tier Nolan, right, a new tx version would be required.
I have to look deeper into the CT as sf proposal.
What futures upgrades could this conflict with it's precisely the
question here. So that vague statement without providing any example
it's not very valuable.
Although TXO commitments are interesting, I don't think they make UTXO
growth a "non-issue" and I also don't think they justify not doing
this.
Yeah, the costs for spammers are very small and doesn't really improve
things all that much, as acknowledged in the initial post.
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:00 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 05, 2017 at 11:51:45PM +0200, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin-de=
v wrote:
>> This is not a priority, not very important either.
>> Right now it is possible to create 0-value outputs that are spendable
>> and thus stay in the utxo (potentially forever). Requiring at least 1
>> satoshi per output doesn't really do much against a spam attack to the
>> utxo, but I think it would be slightly better than the current
>> situation.
>
> Given that this has a very minimal cost for spammers - just a single sato=
shi -
> I don't think this is worth the risk of making future upgrades more compl=
ex as
> other posters have brought up.
>
> Secondly, I think we have good reason to think that things like my own TX=
O
> commitments and Bram's related work will make UTXO growth a non-issue in =
the
> future.
>
> So, I'd NACK such a proposal myself.
>
> --
> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
|
