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
|
Return-Path: <aj@erisian.com.au>
Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44545C002B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 17 Feb 2023 12:49:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F6764016B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 17 Feb 2023 12:49:54 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 1F6764016B
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham 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 L7uSK7Fuyexy
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 17 Feb 2023 12:49:53 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org F1BC04011D
Received: from cerulean.erisian.com.au (azure.erisian.com.au [172.104.61.193])
by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1BC04011D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 17 Feb 2023 12:49:52 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from 60.42.96.58.static.exetel.com.au ([58.96.42.60]
helo=sapphire.erisian.com.au)
by cerulean.erisian.com.au with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2)
(envelope-from <aj@erisian.com.au>)
id 1pT0BN-0003vL-Bf; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 22:49:47 +1000
Received: by sapphire.erisian.com.au (sSMTP sendmail emulation);
Fri, 17 Feb 2023 22:49:41 +1000
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2023 22:49:41 +1000
From: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>
To: Russell O'Connor <roconnor@blockstream.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <Y+935dALZxEEVMmc@erisian.com.au>
References: <ca8622cb-445e-4258-bbac-b3ee1ce95f4c@protonmail.com>
<57f780b1-f262-9394-036c-70084320e9cf@peersm.com>
<CACrqygCNf3Gv8+VjhyqS4GTb3Epo8qXEKGtQB6sqyR6ib44-fA@mail.gmail.com>
<CABE6yHtM2Dqc63_eURSr7dMirJti5sYnqvHj7vQ_Ab9FC_d04g@mail.gmail.com>
<3d00aacb-585d-f875-784d-34352860d725@peersm.com>
<CACrqygB_FbsRGWYPSUEFTnP15y94Hmo4JtAuv6bH1D3YtbAw9Q@mail.gmail.com>
<b292d887-cbd5-165c-de01-793df2b5e8f3@peersm.com>
<CACrqygAv842ucN7PLYMENXFiSwAZJy2Y+FziJXrWjyCcOXmL3g@mail.gmail.com>
<230265ee-c3f8-dff3-9192-f0c8dc4d913c@peersm.com>
<CAMZUoKkAdQ9TSMm4vPJOrThu_h6VbqwPhOQQR7-Yr+WZ0DMBYw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAMZUoKkAdQ9TSMm4vPJOrThu_h6VbqwPhOQQR7-Yr+WZ0DMBYw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Spam_score: -1.0
X-Spam_bar: -
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Debate: 64 bytes in OP_RETURN VS taproot OP_FALSE
OP_IF OP_PUSH
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, 17 Feb 2023 12:49:54 -0000
On Sat, Feb 04, 2023 at 07:11:35PM -0500, Russell O'Connor via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Since bytes in the witness are cheaper than bytes in the script pubkey,
> there is a crossover point in data size where it will simply be cheaper to
> use witness data.
Given today's standardness constraints, that's true (because you first
need to construct a p2wsh/tapscript output that commits to the data,
then you have to spend it), but it needn't stay that way. Allowing a data
carrier entry in the annex (as contemplated for eltoo [0]) would allow
you to publish the data with a single transaction, with malleability
prevented because the annex content is committed to by the signature.
[0] https://github.com/bitcoin-inquisition/bitcoin/pull/22
I think the cost for publishing data via the witness today is roughly:
115 vb - for the commitment tx
115 vb + datalen/4 - for the publication tx
versus
125 vb + datalen - for a tx with an OP_RETURN output
so the crossover point is at a datalen of about 140 bytes. Perhaps
slightly more or less depending on how much you can combine these
inputs/outputs with other txs you would have made anyway.
With a datacarrier in the annex that has similar or higher limits than
OP_RETURN, I don't think OP_RETURN would ever be cheaper.
The other advantage to using the witness for random data compared to
OP_RETURN is that the txid commits to OP_RETURN output, so you must
download all OP_RETURN data to validate a block's merkle tree, whereas
you can partially validate a block (in particular, you can validate the
spendable utxo set) without downloading witness data [1].
[1] https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27050
Cheers,
aj
|
