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
|
Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Received: from silver.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3C4EC0051
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 3 Oct 2020 13:32:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B9E320377
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 3 Oct 2020 13:32:14 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
Received: from silver.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id BsfNjf2GpnNO
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 3 Oct 2020 13:32:12 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-40135.protonmail.ch (mail-40135.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.135])
by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BFF020378
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 3 Oct 2020 13:32:12 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2020 13:31:58 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail; t=1601731929;
bh=PuU0dX6XOYwPvXrXnA1Z/qKdpgvBqy4BPyx/Hq7ts3U=;
h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From;
b=sBIH7wNpaV3w3zG+KNN9SqIgd/t0lnEXc+wpkufbBJzsNQf+0MKN1rfkdxbeNG3iE
ODuB1v9VorWkZNXvJtdxqP8Klj7mMskV7rEPKUcw/xdHv8LYrQ84EWgfvLYm4ltbZx
Ip+W5arqHbXH2yeCeMspoiX9YfXEjepnExSWpjh4=
To: Chris Belcher <belcher@riseup.net>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <hFfdzFfmpu_9RKZnEAiA4D9cZUos1wGES7Gryb_pc-2NPw5smt5IfNLgCZHzJLr27VkFYADYS7xJoDP6o6i8KndI27-KSsAQY6j025saxpo=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <be095fe7-77ca-f471-43e4-981076f48ed2@riseup.net>
References: <813e51a1-4252-08c0-d42d-5cef32f684bc@riseup.net>
<be095fe7-77ca-f471-43e4-981076f48ed2@riseup.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Detailed protocol design for routed
multi-transaction CoinSwap appendium
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: Sat, 03 Oct 2020 13:32:14 -0000
Good morning Chris,
>
> Looking at these equations, I realize that the incentives against
> post-coinswap-theft-attempt still work even if we set K =3D 0, because th=
e
> extra miner fee paid by Bob could be enough disincentive.
This made me pause for a moment, but on reflection, is correct.
The important difference here relative to v1 is that the mining fee for the=
collateralized contract transaction is deducted from the `Jb` input provid=
ed by Bob.
> Unlike the v1 protocol, each CoinSwap party knows a different version=
of
> the contract transactions, so the taker Alice always knows which make=
r
> broadcast a certain set of contract transactions, and so can always b=
an
> the correct fidelity bond.
Great observation, and an excellent property to have.
Will go think about this more.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
