Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <luke@dashjr.org>) id 1Sg468-0002GL-AH
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sun, 17 Jun 2012 01:16:12 +0000
X-ACL-Warn: 
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([173.242.112.54])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	id 1Sg466-0002BI-Om for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sun, 17 Jun 2012 01:16:12 +0000
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown [97.96.85.141])
	(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
	by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 09C8756054F;
	Sun, 17 Jun 2012 01:16:05 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 01:15:54 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.4.0-gentoo-nestfix; KDE/4.8.1; x86_64; ; )
References: <20120616192651.GA13438@vps7135.xlshosting.net>
	<CABsx9T1_R2RE0S=ygY18OyJ0W+Bxyt5Q75bF4J36r0C8ae4-Fw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgT=eLweqpmRGonuvEYfiGi4nbaKh-uw01PKyMC3qyY71A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgT=eLweqpmRGonuvEYfiGi4nbaKh-uw01PKyMC3qyY71A@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F
X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F
X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201206170115.56502.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
	domain 0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1Sg466-0002BI-Om
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] After compressed pubkeys: hybrid pubkeys
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
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, 17 Jun 2012 01:16:12 -0000

On Saturday, June 16, 2012 11:39:00 PM Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com> 
wrote:
> > RE: 0x06/0x07 'hybrid' public keys:
> >> Any opinions? Forbidding it certainly makes alternative implementation
> >> slightly easier in the future, but I'm not sure the hassle of a network
> >> rule change is worth it.
> > 
> > I say treat any transactions that use them as 'non-standard' -- don't
> > relay/mine them by default, but accept blocks that happen to contain
> > them.
> > 
> > I agree that a rule change isn't worth it right now, but making them
> > non-standard now is easy and should make a rule change in the future
> > easier.
> 
> ACK.  Hopefully no one will mine these before we can merge denying
> them into another rule change. But if they do, oh well.

I'm willing to make Eligius reject these as well, if someone provides a patch 
that doesn't depend on IsStandard being enforced...

Same goes for rejecting OP_NOP<n> - I can't see any legitimate reason we'd 
want these on mainnet right now.

Luke