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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1VdPyZ-0006uu-Iq
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 04 Nov 2013 19:38:15 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.214.177 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.177; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ob0-f177.google.com;
Received: from mail-ob0-f177.google.com ([209.85.214.177])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1VdPyY-0002ae-Qo
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 04 Nov 2013 19:38:15 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f177.google.com with SMTP id vb8so7411616obc.8
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 04 Nov 2013 11:38:09 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.161.10 with SMTP id xo10mr1272801oeb.71.1383593889427;
Mon, 04 Nov 2013 11:38:09 -0800 (PST)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.156.42 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 11:38:09 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20131104181649.GA3847@petertodd.org>
References: <CANEZrP3iYBdg3p7Ru4O-UENY_yyQDA8=9PGn=KDKGGTrZ-xkRw@mail.gmail.com>
<20131104115314.GA1013@savin>
<CANEZrP1uqee1UO=zb+50t9BNtv2voTHoCKQCTQExNyoL=Y0=PA@mail.gmail.com>
<20131104181649.GA3847@petertodd.org>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 20:38:09 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: UyYTY2LVtdbNqJFM9zQznXx3ML0
Message-ID: <CANEZrP18Tz6OwOE7jeS3-Z2m=HuQiue+ZwRzS01mpqbCoPteZQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0117686b4af7e204ea5f0e29
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
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 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
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information. [URIs: petertodd.org]
X-Headers-End: 1VdPyY-0002ae-Qo
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Committing to extra block data/a better
merge-mine standard
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, 04 Nov 2013 19:38:15 -0000
--089e0117686b4af7e204ea5f0e29
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
I like the UUID-as-path idea. That resolves the problem of how to share the
alt-chain merkle tree quite nicely.
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
> No sense in compromising - you need a whole merkle path to prove the
> extra data is valid so you might as well make this a full 256 bits;
>
The Merkle branch doesn't get stored indefinitely though, whereas the
coinbase hash does. The data stored in the coinbase [output] can always
just be the 256-bit root hash truncated to less.
I doubt the additional bytes make much difference really, so the additional
complexity may not be worth it. But it wouldn't be an issue to do.
--089e0117686b4af7e204ea5f0e29
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">I like the UUID-as-path idea. That resolves the problem of=
how to share the alt-chain merkle tree quite nicely.<div class=3D"gmail_ex=
tra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Peter T=
odd <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:pete@petertodd.org" target=3D"_=
blank">pete@petertodd.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">No sense in compromising - you need a whole =
merkle path to prove the<br>
extra data is valid so you might as well make this a full 256 bits;<br></bl=
ockquote><div><br></div><div>The Merkle branch doesn't get stored indef=
initely though, whereas the coinbase hash does. The data stored in the coin=
base [output] can always just be the 256-bit root hash truncated to less.</=
div>
<div><br></div><div>I doubt the additional bytes make much difference reall=
y, so the additional complexity may not be worth it. But it wouldn't be=
an issue to do.</div></div></div></div>
--089e0117686b4af7e204ea5f0e29--
|
