blob: e2838a02b065127cf0bdfc8dde340ccf453a51b1 (
plain)
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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1R9fuP-00073j-2r
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:25:57 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 74.125.82.175 as permitted sender)
client-ip=74.125.82.175; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-wy0-f175.google.com;
Received: from mail-wy0-f175.google.com ([74.125.82.175])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1R9fuO-0006Dy-6r
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:25:57 +0000
Received: by wyh5 with SMTP id 5so1793758wyh.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 30 Sep 2011 09:25:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.133.1 with SMTP id p1mr4175115wei.110.1317399949973; Fri,
30 Sep 2011 09:25:49 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.216.52.81 with HTTP; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 09:25:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T2QzafV-uzn7yL01gs2mrzLaP0FCgjt_O--Ldw+s-Xm9w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T2QzafV-uzn7yL01gs2mrzLaP0FCgjt_O--Ldw+s-Xm9w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 09:25:49 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: Z8YtYpPoKTTmP5CoZZr9YmcR0qs
Message-ID: <CANEZrP2fqvivhnjSDsLiYdYJ09E7y+=EmsVH3BvLmA4tGri7bQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6ddff460b996e04ae2b14fa
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
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
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
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
-0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1R9fuO-0006Dy-6r
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Multisignature transations
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, 30 Sep 2011 16:25:57 -0000
--0016e6ddff460b996e04ae2b14fa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> This adds initial support for three new types of transactions:
> (a and b)
> (a or b)
> (a and b) or c
>
Does this mean dispute mediation (2-of-3) will not be supported? I thought
the plan was also to allow CHECKMULTISIG for smallish numbers of keys.
--0016e6ddff460b996e04ae2b14fa
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">This adds initial support for three new types of transactions:<br>
(a and b)<br>
(a or b)<br>
(a and b) or c<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Does this mean dispute mediation (2-of-3) will not be supported? I thought the plan was also to allow CHECKMULTISIG for smallish numbers of keys.</div></div>
--0016e6ddff460b996e04ae2b14fa--
|
