Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44FAB1205 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2018 20:42:31 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 00:09:45 by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from hank.reardencode.com (hank.reardencode.com [206.125.169.162]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4B668B for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2018 20:42:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by hank.reardencode.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 593E22E003; Thu, 6 Sep 2018 13:32:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=reardencode.com; s=default; t=1536265964; bh=LoDtMCrPAfMD+HGEtBCVYptOImmUt38LKurs2gwBQfc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=lq9xBtMTiZ3qOJdr9v3udF6cA2BSpRlU6PIQJIM6FZtyo92FZGXML+qiKKCWtHByR 0nOgKAojxUm0i+9WUTqCswH7WWY1h8Y0EOEscF6t+S/VX83QrgwH3XfgrxUi8Hyozo ePNfDOEnqK3oy4CAzxTl93rS8ocz4JQXxFA3MhrI= Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 13:32:44 -0700 From: Brandon Smith To: Gregory Maxwell , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: <20180906203244.GQ62902@hank.reardencode.com> References: <3d4162e0-1f8b-0f23-85fc-9d18d4352cae@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 10.4-RELEASE-p8 amd64 User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.5 (2018-04-13) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 06 Sep 2018 23:33:40 +0000 Cc: sara.tucci@cea.fr, Onder.GURCAN@cea.fr, a.ranchalpedrosa@gmail.com Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A BIP proposal for transactions that are 'cancellable' X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2018 20:42:31 -0000 I made a similar proposal about 7 months ago, and documented some of the discussion points here: https://github.com/reardencode/bips/blob/reverselocktime/bip-0zzz.mediawiki On 2018-09-06 (Thu) at 15:16:34 +0000, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Functionality such as this does not currently exist not because no one > thought of it before, but because it has been proposed many times > before and determined to be harmful. The existing design of CLTV/CSV > were carefully constructed to make it impossible for a transaction to > go from valid to invalid based on the time. The most naive > construction-- e.g. push the current time/height on the stack-- would > have that property and was specifically avoided. > > When a spend goes from valid to invalid it means that a reorganization > will destroy coins even completely absent any dishonest actions of the > coins prior owner in the coins recent casual history. Effectively a > coin with any kind of non-monotone validity event in its recent > history functions like a recently generated coin: a coin that reorgs > destroy. Bitcoin addresses the issue for recently generated coins by > not permitting their use for 100 blocks. I've yet to see an argument > for a use case for non-monotone validity that still sounds useful once > the negative effects are addressed (e.g. by subjecting coins that have > gone through them to a maturity limitation). > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev