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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pete@petertodd.org>) id 1Z24iZ-0002my-79
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 08 Jun 2015 21:36:27 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
designates 62.13.148.111 as permitted sender)
client-ip=62.13.148.111; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
helo=outmail148111.authsmtp.net;
Received: from outmail148111.authsmtp.net ([62.13.148.111])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1Z24iX-0007A4-0m for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 08 Jun 2015 21:36:27 +0000
Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235])
by punt18.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t58LaHdf068913;
Mon, 8 Jun 2015 22:36:17 +0100 (BST)
Received: from muck (bas3-cooksville17-1176329630.dsl.bell.ca [70.29.93.158])
(authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t58LaBr9073613
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Mon, 8 Jun 2015 22:36:14 +0100 (BST)
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 17:36:11 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Danny Thorpe <danny.thorpe@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20150608213611.GB19826@muck>
References: <87k2vhfnx9.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
<CAJN5wHVSK-oW+zVZmEMfyFkd+GUHRhFHEjEmKrdvqas3LzY0zw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gatW/ieO32f1wygP"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJN5wHVSK-oW+zVZmEMfyFkd+GUHRhFHEjEmKrdvqas3LzY0zw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Server-Quench: 6482014c-0e26-11e5-b396-002590a15da7
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aQdMdgoUEkAaAgsB AmMbWVZeU1t7WGU7 bApPbwxDa0lQXgBi
T01BRU1TWkFtCWBQ dFwXUh5xcQRFNn9w Zk9kEHZfVEZ6dEIu
X04BF2sbZGY1bX1N U0leagNUcgZDfk5E bwQuUz1vNG8XDQg5
AwQ0PjZ0MThBJSBS WgQAK04nCXUxMBUJ DzsLGzIpHEYMQ20y
KQQ7NhYVGkpZNVgu KUY9EVUCPxIICwtR fQlMBmdFPVAHXCMg EQJdW1V2
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 70.29.93.158/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
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 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
X-Headers-End: 1Z24iX-0007A4-0m
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [RFC] Canonical input and output ordering
in transactions
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: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 21:36:27 -0000
--gatW/ieO32f1wygP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 02:25:40PM -0700, Danny Thorpe wrote:
> FWIW, The Open Assets colored coin protocol (CoinPrism) places special
> significance on the zeroth input and the position of the OP_RETURN colored
> coin marker output to distinguish colored coin issuance outputs from
> transfer outputs. Reordering the inputs or the outputs breaks the colored
> coin representation.
>=20
> Recommending sorting of the inputs and outputs as a best practice is fine
> (and better than random, IMO), but not as part of IsStandard() or consens=
us
> rules. There are cases where the order of the inputs and outputs is
> significant.
Timestamping is another case where order matters: if you put the digest
in the last vout you can use SHA256 midstate's to reduce the size of the
timestamp proof.
Anyway, there's no reason to rush re: changes to IsStandard()
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
0000000000000000127ab1d576dc851f374424f1269c4700ccaba2c42d97e778
--gatW/ieO32f1wygP
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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==
=5Pf8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--gatW/ieO32f1wygP--
|
