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
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
|
Return-Path: <decker.christian@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB6F690
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 21 Oct 2015 08:49:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com (mail-wi0-f172.google.com
[209.85.212.172])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09F5E8C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 21 Oct 2015 08:49:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wicll6 with SMTP id ll6so80384624wic.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 21 Oct 2015 01:49:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=q3OIh/eUw9kfKo7R5UCxilbQMj52djP71Xjy9G7Ywhs=;
b=yAX9aoyFf4DWPatWFz4pvm5vdP2QpDIr2sVdd49Hji6jc+UQU/ELZKH48G33ncDwl8
eamCpBDKC8f+ubOJazFyKDfEWU1DhL3CjTJehToZ7L/YHFm/9pSqd38qy3Jn+b1stWfl
jZEVfDWAbdOvSFpKqhAJT0VC7NxlL5ljfwIj3VeH+sqHILIoM1dAV6rgnBQbh30TGM2w
p4r+HwOmL8cl08F2Y+uepjpoZq/snZ44QDYKxlOH0pky/8vzvKLe2Hdx/HfuDfZK3vTg
PMluSPm17SWDxr+lSScpvIdukiqVGQzFO+eDshh3/tPgifbvZEw1AqaXNw1HxWo+ROpm
iaUA==
X-Received: by 10.180.216.36 with SMTP id on4mr9765891wic.65.1445417375532;
Wed, 21 Oct 2015 01:49:35 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CALxbBHU+kdEAh_4+B663vknAAr8OKZpUzVTACORPZi47E=Ehkw@mail.gmail.com>
<201510210618.56159.luke@dashjr.org>
<CAAS2fgT4DU1MuOwo0Qr4yMNRamajD=KrOVP93pzApWMpry-Srg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgR7X2j9buFQXvgmWZCfoasRa=nLB5efnu-ZnqFZC+SeuQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgR7X2j9buFQXvgmWZCfoasRa=nLB5efnu-ZnqFZC+SeuQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 08:49:26 +0000
Message-ID: <CALxbBHV14BW+S809rX0TuAjB65b90=1bnN6pondQO6qWVPi3+w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>, Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134c69c39128d052299754a
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP] Normalized transaction IDs
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 08:49:37 -0000
--001a1134c69c39128d052299754a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:26 AM Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I'm still sad that uniform segregated witeness is so hard to deploy,
> > adding another id to every utxo set won't be a nice cost. :( But I
> > have been trying for a long time to come up with anything better and
> > not being successful.
>
> Oh good. Luke solved it.
>
> To deploy SW without a disruptive flag day this encoding could be used:
>
> A new P2SH like scriptPubkey type is defined. In the soft-fork, the
> scriptsig for this scriptPubkey is required to be empty.
>
> Signatures are not covered under txid, but carried along side. Then
> committed to in blocks in a separate hashtree.
>
>
Isn't that sort of what this BIP describes as well? Except that we use the
scriptSig to transport the signatures internally to the transactions and
strip them when it comes to signing/checking? The wire format and transport
of transactions do not change so old clients continue to fetch and process
transactions as before, they just can't verify the TX. Blocks still
reference the instance but verification uses the stripped TX with the
signatures on the side, etc.
> The only disadvantage to the approach used in elements alpha that I
> can come up with so far (in the few minutes since luke turned my can't
> into a can) is that that the approach in EA did not disrupt the normal
> relay handling process, and this would, since relay that transports
> the extradata either needs to use a different hash that includes the
> witness, or have a separate mechanism for witness transport.
>
--001a1134c69c39128d052299754a
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Wed, Oct 21=
, 2015 at 10:26 AM Gregory Maxwell <<a href=3D"mailto:gmaxwell@gmail.com=
">gmaxwell@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quo=
te" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"=
>On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Gregory Maxwell <<a href=3D"mailto:gma=
xwell@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">gmaxwell@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> I'm still sad that uniform segregated witeness is so hard to deplo=
y,<br>
> adding another id to every utxo set won't be a nice cost. :( But I=
<br>
> have been trying for a long time to come up with anything better and<b=
r>
> not being successful.<br>
<br>
Oh good. Luke solved it.<br>
<br>
To deploy SW without a disruptive flag day this encoding could be used:<br>
<br>
A new P2SH like scriptPubkey type is defined. In the soft-fork, the<br>
scriptsig for this scriptPubkey is required to be empty.<br>
<br>
Signatures are not covered under txid, but carried along side. Then<br>
committed to in blocks in a separate hashtree.<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Isn't that sort of what this BIP d=
escribes as well? Except that we use the scriptSig to transport the signatu=
res internally to the transactions and strip them when it comes to signing/=
checking? The wire format and transport of transactions do not change so ol=
d clients continue to fetch and process transactions as before, they just c=
an't verify the TX. Blocks still reference the instance but verificatio=
n uses the stripped TX with the signatures on the side, etc.</div><div>=C2=
=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;borde=
r-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
The only disadvantage to the approach used in elements alpha that I<br>
can come up with so far (in the few minutes since luke turned my can't<=
br>
into a can) is that that the approach in EA did not disrupt the normal<br>
relay handling process, and this would, since relay that transports<br>
the extradata either needs to use a different hash that includes the<br>
witness, or have a separate mechanism for witness transport.<br>
</blockquote></div></div>
--001a1134c69c39128d052299754a--
|
