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: <apoelstra@wpsoftware.net>
Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13E5AC000A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:55:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF05E40395
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:55:52 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id MhgUdQdVxEL4
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:55:49 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail.wpsoftware.net (unknown [66.183.0.205])
by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F17A640384
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:55:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from camus (camus-andrew.lan [192.168.0.190])
by mail.wpsoftware.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3C1C04018D;
Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:47:59 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:55:47 +0000
From: Andrew Poelstra <apoelstra@wpsoftware.net>
To: Christopher Gilliard <christopher.gilliard@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <YHmzg15MAzHLRC5p@camus>
References: <CAK=nyAxOa8fsVfxucH7WTTMn25BCzgQ28h_sNsunedpCoRXjjQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAMZUoKmR6ZU6mAgEhKDD5cTMuja_OC0_Sz3x4UND=E-g1PkgsQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAK=nyAz5+yMUA=XDcunA1eeachSisaJoYE2_yzTLj=B0r4=w5A@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAK=nyAz5+yMUA=XDcunA1eeachSisaJoYE2_yzTLj=B0r4=w5A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - limiting OP_RETURN / HF
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: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:55:53 -0000
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 03:34:33PM +0000, Christopher Gilliard via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> This sounds like a good justification to remove the legacy multi-signature
> capabilities as well.
>
Doing so would confiscate coins, and also it is impossible to remove
legacy multisignatures in general without gutting almost all of Script.
> >> Thus, given that it is otherwise impossible to stop people from putting
> arbitrary data values into their transactions, then we rather encourage
> people who are going to encode their arbitrary data in transaction to use
> the OP_RETURN outputs in order to avoid UTXO bloat.
>
> You can't make it completely impossible to do that, but you can make it
> harder and at the same time you can provide a solution for doing what they
> want to do.
>
I don't think you can even make it harder in a meaningful sense. There is
too much flexibility in transaction data.
--
Andrew Poelstra
Director of Research, Blockstream
Email: apoelstra at wpsoftware.net
Web: https://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew
The sun is always shining in space
-Justin Lewis-Webster
|
