Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YE21c-000314-1b for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 20:37:16 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.213.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.213.47; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com; helo=mail-yh0-f47.google.com; Received: from mail-yh0-f47.google.com ([209.85.213.47]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YE21X-0001Uw-Uw for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 20:37:16 +0000 Received: by mail-yh0-f47.google.com with SMTP id z6so9198108yhz.6 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 12:37:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.105.180 with SMTP id k40mr24601736yhg.85.1421872626566; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 12:37:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.170.130.19 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 12:37:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <54BFFE30.8010105@bitcoinarmory.com> References: <54BFFE30.8010105@bitcoinarmory.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 15:37:06 -0500 Message-ID: From: Gavin Andresen To: Bitcoin Dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0160b8b4d28a30050d2f8456 X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gavinandresen[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1YE21X-0001Uw-Uw Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [softfork proposal] Strict DER signatures X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 20:37:16 -0000 --089e0160b8b4d28a30050d2f8456 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 DERSIG BIP looks great to me, just a few nit-picky changes suggested: You mention the "DER standard" : should link to http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/com17/languages/X.690-0207.pdf (or whatever is best reference for DER). "this would simplify avoiding OpenSSL in consensus implementations" --> "this would make it easier for non-OpenSSL implementations" "causing opcode failure" : I know what you mean by "opcode failure", but it might be good to be more explicit. "since v0.8.0, and nearly no transactions" --> "and very few transactions..." "reducing this avenue for malleability is useful on itself as well" : awkward English. How about just "This proposal has the added benefit of reducing transaction malleability (see BIP62)." -- -- Gavin Andresen --089e0160b8b4d28a30050d2f8456 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
DERSIG BIP looks great to me, j= ust a few nit-picky changes suggested:

=
You mention the "DER standard" := should link to=A0http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/com17/languages= /X.690-0207.pdf (or whatever is best reference for DER).

"this would sim= plify avoiding OpenSSL in consensus implementations" =A0--> "t= his would make it easier for non-OpenSSL implementations"

"causing opcode failure" =A0: I know wha= t you mean by "opcode failure", but it might be good to be more e= xplicit.

"since v0.8.0, and nearly no transac= tions" --> =A0"and very few transactions..."
"reducing this avenue for malleability is useful on itsel= f as well" =A0: awkward English. How about just "This proposal ha= s the added benefit of reducing transaction malleability (see BIP62)."=


--
-= -
Gavin Andresen
--089e0160b8b4d28a30050d2f8456--