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
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <s7r@sky-ip.org>) id 1Z6eQl-0004VS-Cp
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 21 Jun 2015 12:32:59 +0000
Received-SPF: neutral (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: 162.222.225.13 is
neither permitted nor denied by domain of sky-ip.org)
client-ip=162.222.225.13; envelope-from=s7r@sky-ip.org;
helo=outbound.mailhostbox.com;
Received: from outbound.mailhostbox.com ([162.222.225.13])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1Z6eQa-0002Pr-8L for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 21 Jun 2015 12:32:59 +0000
Received: from [0.0.0.0] (tor-exit1.arbitrary.ch [78.46.51.124])
(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
(Authenticated sender: s7r@sky-ip.org)
by outbound.mailhostbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 534541A117B;
Sun, 21 Jun 2015 12:32:35 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <5586AEDD.9000606@sky-ip.org>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 15:32:29 +0300
From: s7r <s7r@sky-ip.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64;
rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Braun Brelin <bbrelin@gmail.com>
References: <CAJ2Ovpi_qYFqXZ9hWdobVj1Km04soXVm7GwN+M3Ay8yhZCHhGg@mail.gmail.com>
<558679AA.9010308@sky-ip.org>
<CAJ2Ovph8ijL8v0r-gK4NNt7zA7G-1eTTsk7ZWqbw3HqD8jbF7A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ2Ovph8ijL8v0r-gK4NNt7zA7G-1eTTsk7ZWqbw3HqD8jbF7A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-CMAE-Score: 0
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=csZm6AMi c=1 sm=1 tr=0
a=5SmMhNOMuTJxAAiWNA+9yA==:117 a=5SmMhNOMuTJxAAiWNA+9yA==:17
a=-NIMs_s3AAAA:8 a=QrohdLjRRo4A:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=bvjBBkZ6AAAA:8
a=FP58Ms26AAAA:8 a=cuEeAFZV_AFpaWPOg40A:9 a=3A4lpyn9y1e3NDPS:21
a=m4pjdrNrU6z5aAnW:21 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10
X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A020201.5586AEE6.010C, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000,
reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0
X-CTCH-VOD: Unknown
X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown
X-CTCH-Score: 0.000
X-CTCH-Rules:
X-CTCH-Flags: 0
X-CTCH-ScoreCust: 0.000
X-CTCH-SenderID: s7r@sky-ip.org
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalMessages: 1
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalSpam: 0
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalSuspected: 0
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalBulk: 0
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalConfirmed: 0
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalRecipients: 0
X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalVirus: 0
X-CTCH-SenderID-BlueWhiteFlag: 0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 172.18.214.92
X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [162.222.225.13 listed in list.dnswl.org]
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
0.7 SPF_NEUTRAL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (neutral)
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid
X-Headers-End: 1Z6eQa-0002Pr-8L
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Question regarding transactions with
NLOCKTIME > 0
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: s7r@sky-ip.org
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: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 12:32:59 -0000
Hi,
Well, depends on your model and what you want to achieve. That would
depend on each wallet, I couldn't confirm nor deny that this is or isn't
true. You have to check with your wallet how it handles transactions
with nLockTime. Maybe you are the one who generates the nLockTime
transaction, but that needs to be broadcasted by the payee (your
recipient) when the locktime expires?
One way I would use nLockTime is to have the tx generated, and keep it
somewhere not related to my wallet(s) until the nLockTime expires, then
I can broadcast it to the network by /sendrawtransaction and have it
mined and included into a block.
On 6/21/2015 3:11 PM, Braun Brelin wrote:
> So, basically it sounds as though the wallet generating the transaction
> is what is responsible for holding on to the transaction and then
> only releasing it to the network when the NLOCKTIME value is less than
> or equal to the current time. Does that sound right?
>
> Braun
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 10:45 AM, s7r <s7r@sky-ip.org
> <mailto:s7r@sky-ip.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I don't think that a transaction with nLockTime>0 will be accepted by
> nodes / relayed in the Bitcoin network, until its time expires (e.g.
> nLockTime==now). This means it obviously cannot be stored in a block,
> before its locktime expires. nLockTime is designed in a way that you,
> need to keep it offline (not broadcast it to the network because it
> won't be accepted or relayed by nodes) until the locktime expires, then
> you can broadcast it and it will be mined and included in a block, like
> a normal tx.
>
> This is exactly why Peter Todd and others are working on
> CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY and RELATIVE CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY - this is an
> enhancement to basic nLockTime which tends to offer to users the
> guarantee that if you have a transaction with nLockTime, the signer
> holding the private keys used to sign it cannot sign another one, with
> nLockTime 0 and broadcast it before the locktime for your tx expires.
>
> Cheers!
>
> On 6/21/2015 10:10 AM, Braun Brelin wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > When a transaction with N_LOCKTIME>0 is created, does that transaction
> > get stored in a block on the blockchain or is it stored in the mempool
> > until the actual time (or block number) exceeds the current value? If
> > it is stored on the blockchain, how does that affect the concept of
> > pruning that is supposed to be going in to version 0.11? I.e. if I
> > create a transaction that doesn't take effect for 10 years, and that
> > transaction is stored in a block, does that block stay on the active
> > list for that period of time?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Braun Brelin
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
> > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> <mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> >
>
>
|
