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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <etotheipi@gmail.com>) id 1YEh0s-0005W0-JS
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:23:14 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.216.49 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.216.49; envelope-from=etotheipi@gmail.com;
helo=mail-qa0-f49.google.com;
Received: from mail-qa0-f49.google.com ([209.85.216.49])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YEh0r-0003p2-M9
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:23:14 +0000
Received: by mail-qa0-f49.google.com with SMTP id v8so6431582qal.8
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 08:23:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.140.106.100 with SMTP id d91mr14627041qgf.18.1422030187883;
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 08:23:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.28] (c-69-143-204-74.hsd1.md.comcast.net.
[69.143.204.74])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id j6sm1842491qai.34.2015.01.23.08.23.07
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 08:23:07 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <54C2756A.2020907@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 11:23:06 -0500
From: Alan Reiner <etotheipi@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64;
rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
References: <CAJna-HjwMRff_+7BvcR2YME9f2yUQPvfKOGZ1qq9d0nOGqORkg@mail.gmail.com> <54C267A1.8090208@gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgQSAj=YHhtvy=MY9GvbEZNxtLUwzfrdPnSQBUKZYdj4oA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgQSAj=YHhtvy=MY9GvbEZNxtLUwzfrdPnSQBUKZYdj4oA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: -1.1 (-)
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
(etotheipi[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
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
0.5 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
X-Headers-End: 1YEh0r-0003p2-M9
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] SIGHASH_WITHINPUTVALUE
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: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:23:14 -0000
On 01/23/2015 11:05 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Alan Reiner <etotheipi@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Unfortunately, it seems that there was no soft-fork way to achieve this
>> benefit, at least not one that had favorable properties. Most of the
>> soft-fork variations of it required the coins being spent to have been
>> originated in a special way. In other words, it would only work if the
>> coins had entered the wallet with some special, modified TxOut script. So
>> it wouldn't work with existing coins, and would require senders to update
>> their software to reshape the way they send transactions to be compatible
>> with our goals.
> I think this is unreasonable. There is a straight-forward soft-fork
> approach which is safe (e.g. no risk of invalidating existing
> transactions). Yes, it means that you need to use newly created
> addresses to get coins that use the new signature type... but thats
> only the case for people who want the new capability. This is
> massively preferable to expecting _every_ _other_ user of the system
> (including miners, full nodes, etc.) to replace their software with an
> incompatible new version just to accommodate your transactions, for
> which they may care nothing about and which would otherwise not have
> any urgent need to change.
>
>
As far as I'm concerned, anything that requires the coins to originate
in the wallet with some special form is a non-starter. The new SIGHASH
type allows you to sign transactions with any coins already in your
wallet, and imposes no requirements on anyone paying your cold wallet.
Any such proposals that require origination structure means that 100% of
people paying you need to "be nice" and use this new script type, or
else you *have* to
|
