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
|
Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62CBEC002D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 21 Nov 2022 23:52:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29C6A81E46
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 21 Nov 2022 23:52:08 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 29C6A81E46
Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org;
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com header.i=@protonmail.com
header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=protonmail3 header.b=npXhPehE
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.601 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, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 6R-NDMysU1Pq
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 21 Nov 2022 23:52:07 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 0490481E41
Received: from mail-4325.protonmail.ch (mail-4325.protonmail.ch [185.70.43.25])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0490481E41
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 21 Nov 2022 23:52:06 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 23:52:00 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail3; t=1669074724; x=1669333924;
bh=EzIAsSKVrpKRqhyPyOqpAOEMfjBSGAwKPT9vF8eC2tk=;
h=Date:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:
Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:
Message-ID:BIMI-Selector;
b=npXhPehEDFMR++BB6m/MeeXv5prSDSufyHyZosLVWD70t63MDHA6sZ8gAFXXlQbn4
FX+F/3hTbgF9CfhidDF4O9PlgSG5GP1+05iC6ekE5PSkTMXaCm2IMJ1O84OCog1vjZ
LItj2imGiI/rMXZToqaYgoLvSE5n65iZJkaE5lFC4YWguX22PMkKdtpK402wkdWq98
i1VLvGohF2PjzfUryNvOJ8XfeXR6fRQPbcpOwvvWgQPJGu10nccLYyOaZo0LeuGirk
W9hzjSEAsQUJJ40VLwhe6fhCYpLgrOw3eHKZe3vHXqUXrzJnx+OKXL/OJK01qjCt/7
XQ5FmI/0U1Q/Q==
To: Andrew Melnychuk Oseen <amo.personal@protonmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <Kcqi_Svol1F4H8rGnnECZXRkb5Aa_763DlNUP4froIqLovFk-SrOnWXC5ZPtfRjzHb55_BTe07h6PH5OdaY2zpNPNTix__bqYiBIEw2IbjA=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <zKbMpqEqH6Z4p1GE2rlsOky1fMPBsEFGaeNk8WIcbez__-fR3ahnYEWOgExHC8KXAYCqtt4gMa7WBXkNSqL6fO9sjsvyu9AZRPQIQADqthg=@protonmail.com>
References: <zKbMpqEqH6Z4p1GE2rlsOky1fMPBsEFGaeNk8WIcbez__-fR3ahnYEWOgExHC8KXAYCqtt4gMa7WBXkNSqL6fO9sjsvyu9AZRPQIQADqthg=@protonmail.com>
Feedback-ID: 2872618:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Relative txout amounts with a Merkleized Sum Tree
and explicit miner fee.
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: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 23:52:08 -0000
Good morning Andrew,
>=20
>=20
> Can output amounts be mapped to a tap branch? For the goal of secure part=
ial spends of a single UTXO? Looking for feedback on this idea. I got it fr=
om Taro.
Not at all.
The issue you are facing here is that only one tap branch will ever consume=
the entire input amount.
That is: while Taproot has multiple leaves, only exactly one leaf will ever=
be published onchain and that gets the whole amount.
What you want is multiple tree leaves where ALL of them will EVENTUALLY be =
published, just not right now.
In that case, look at the tree structures for `OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY`, whi=
ch are exactly what you are looking for, and help make `OP_CTV` a reality.
Without `OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY` it is possible to use presigned transactio=
ns in a tree structure to do this same construction.
Presigned transactions are known to be larger than `OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY`=
--- signatures on taproot are 64 bytes of witness, but an `OP_CHECKTEMPLAT=
EVERIFY` in a P2WSH reveals just 32 bytes of witness plus the `OP_CHECKTEMP=
LATEVERIFY` opcode.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
