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
|
Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 083EDC001A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 25 Feb 2022 12:48:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3AAB4012A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 25 Feb 2022 12:48:23 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.602
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.602 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,
FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001,
SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com
Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id V7F0CEEfDdcn
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 25 Feb 2022 12:48:23 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-40132.protonmail.ch (mail-40132.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.132])
by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24DDC4000B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 25 Feb 2022 12:48:22 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 12:48:11 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail3; t=1645793300;
bh=/CSYmS98zxAAJVVSTlluOwcdKXD6BJ3eaHknMk3YzQQ=;
h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:
References:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:
Message-ID;
b=sk9Hu3P7Rc89gXfQkUhOXzmE2/6M22og4yavrEzcnRiJpfQhYk2gCLOuhsUqvMede
W/adtr6jFj71x8Ze5e5EV37wKSlNCSe3uPo4LSUZ/q/XaIP1rUUIYHK2xwDoyMNjG1
wUkO7uTHQmbK4NGTTALO3xjhHqVJLWPSBn0fbADlyhib3FHDPmJJeg3Qp5l0wnGH4k
fxKEmwb4si0OnHXkGS3s+B3uuZ1GQ3PERkbQd4CRm3U3xZivct7Iie4453Phe7cwZW
yS+QiqAZPVw7+xusfw99Fk9xfLfde9DUHQXQVD6Gyplv1gwqHexyZKDJYatG0a00i1
zas5McmgsRCiA==
To: Zac Greenwood <zachgrw@gmail.com>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <JGiZgKJbF8rNYsQfjHNeqRqRUyfUuGaP0_W7Y9-uyyhDF0odqoF3dPitBwe7uXmhUh8TcwFOYGymzrgMhc2Kgq9NovHQSf_d0jRsDFH3zuk=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ4-pEDAKPFQF-tuzYw+Hc0moViZ4kyoVz91mESkqb-GQZ35aQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <157744394-3dec42994f1798ce65b00e23b21ea656@pmq2v.m5r2.onet>
<CAJ4-pEBnprd-SdXMZeDsJ37=SiGbQEnaFfpvBzryR21Wbqc1Ew@mail.gmail.com>
<vmZt7irtItdhrsha-cHM0-HgzhCQ6GlWdJXr6mKzEHXmoNz5ypuQLR9eKsltreHb0O2kMfcr_VRkZ1hmoJ9RAp5DaMZorhG1JsRSclhin6s=@protonmail.com>
<CAJ4-pECnAebQGN2=22ifGga9rtO2svdxY1bX96_VEW-wpjEpWw@mail.gmail.com>
<XrV3nIrTZfdzTb7tsbwX5xP4COd6pXCA076lWzbXvbhnn7bx6kThL5JzeCxwoimCXKmpux5Gbjycj7t6X8ncYBWx5-HMi2voDuKZm27_h00=@protonmail.com>
<CAJ4-pEDAKPFQF-tuzYw+Hc0moViZ4kyoVz91mESkqb-GQZ35aQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] OP_RETURN inside TapScript
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, 25 Feb 2022 12:48:24 -0000
Good morning Zac,
> Hi ZmnSCPxj,
>
> To me it seems that more space can be saved.
>
> The data-=E2=80=9Ctransaction=E2=80=9D need not specify any output. The n=
etwork could subtract the fee amount of the transaction directly from the s=
pecified UTXO.
That is not how UTXO systems like Bitcoin work.
Either you consume the entire UTXO (take away the "U" from the "UTXO") comp=
letely and in full, or you do not touch the UTXO (and cannot get fees from =
it).
> A fee also need not to be specified.
Fees are never explicit in Bitcoin; it is always the difference between tot=
al input amount minus the total output amount.
> It can be calculated in advance both by the network and the transaction s=
ender based on the size of the data.
It is already implicitly calculated by the difference between the total inp=
ut amount minus the total output amount.
You seem to misunderstand as well.
Fee rate is computed from the fee (computed from total input minus total ou=
tput) divided by the transaction weight.
Nodes do not compute fees from feerate and weight.
> The calculation of the fee should be such that it only marginally cheaper=
to use this new construct over using one or more transactions. For instanc=
e, sending 81 bytes should cost as much as two OP_RETURN transactions (minu=
s some marginal discount to incentivize the use of this more efficient way =
to store data).
Do you want to change weight calculations?
*reducing* weight calculations is a hardfork, increasing it is a softfork.
> If the balance of the selected UTXO is insufficient to pay for the data t=
hen the transaction will be invalid.
>
> I can=E2=80=99t judge whether this particular approach would require a ha=
rdfork, sadly.
See above note, if you want to somehow reduce the weight of the data so as =
to reduce the cost of data relative to `OP_RETURN`, that is a hardfork.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
