Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81FB6C000B for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2022 17:02:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A1A183E19 for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2022 17:02:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5wcvjIIg46Sp for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2022 17:02:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail-lf1-x130.google.com (mail-lf1-x130.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::130]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A3A083E17 for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2022 17:02:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id z4so18034656lft.3 for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2022 09:02:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=3Q9T9a3OQ9X1M63XF52eG9pH980qPbvqrPgG2xltHEQ=; b=lG3snBiB1JmnfD3m5Ozoy+rOzdu4xvr9ubM/JwVQL8wJCpic5LQ1oTdxNjzIVTnbl7 x7RweGTLheT4GFKbWdRRbk/nQ337svAzif6inMA2zvfqB+YzJQlzhCL0kzeIJ9Ax8Y+M vQbquYaVwa9O4USKqqjwu1OLRYpLXM6+NlJdc2W7x/5g7i5k0IEfCA+mHVeDXTCu+WYY JAUCmnk9cdZu+dcl3obygtri/ngsxdzy58gsHXxpwYdkzz7TBSZMxRqKRwNTi8VhTFXO vZtC0/pZH705NNjpqtmnNeih9hQ4XYogguYROrqQmSbd6jgPePLDDxEKJsJLO/Gryqta qu5Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=3Q9T9a3OQ9X1M63XF52eG9pH980qPbvqrPgG2xltHEQ=; b=V0s+C0yCm5tc10xDxCizxC10N+4Mo8ZQRjamSFaw5UaJvRKreIMRXSQwEB79A5wBj9 VLP5N5qccADNs9PUGKLQhT7lFayEzN/G+GSnKhzlJyyeDvSFHMO+iUnuB9kgqQp5ErdZ 563xU7rmbWCQ63r9Hj9GJYmzDsKsrPH1V5C2bIy6VDT9RuRiWdrOaOVCjtJzklg0vbdF rM29sW/hTdOyKb8YW9Ufhrz3MpNDtveu61Qe6UD5wui55yIrrpULl7yTIs1W5ghiYVVn qaBFiHD1sMyoRMkN6OxIWBQWK8oVD8h6LY+SvWiqdMXqTd6Y8O2g7GRmNM8ssqgUghJJ fMhQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530V2ywEsG6m0OnhNRh0MtEaCZfDQRsHIbjD4ByjLYVNml5qnWjP TJH5VEhaCfmAMjjmFczH2LJuDdHr1/GuR4G9e90= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzmLOOFnRNF2GwXiQElICH2W5RPx1MjTYfY2ei9Y/qTMydqdiBTpHp4ozwnzjiIH2T2o41UgQ2lulzmXoxOmhw= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5fc7:: with SMTP id q7mr9611162lfg.175.1643475769254; Sat, 29 Jan 2022 09:02:49 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Jeremy Rubin Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 09:02:37 -0800 Message-ID: To: "Russell O'Connor" , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006c662505d6bb857a" Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] TXHASH + CHECKSIGFROMSTACKVERIFY in lieu of CTV and ANYPREVOUT X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 17:02:52 -0000 --0000000000006c662505d6bb857a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Perhaps there is some misunderstanding. TXHASH + CSFSV doesn't allow for complex or recursive covenants. Typically CAT is needed, at minimum, to create those sorts of things. TXHASH still amounts to deploying a non-recursive covenant construction. This seems false to me. txhash txhash equalverify Is that not a recursive covenant? With a little extra work you can also control for amounts and stuff. --0000000000006c662505d6bb857a Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Pe= rhaps there is some misunderstanding.=C2=A0 TXHASH=C2=A0+ CSFSV doesn't= allow for complex or recursive covenants.=C2=A0 Typically CAT is needed, a= t minimum, to create those sorts of things.=C2=A0 TXHASH still amounts to d= eploying a non-recursive covenant construction.


This seem= s false to me.=C2=A0

=
<Only hash a single i= nput scriptpubkey> txhash <only hash a single output scriptpubkey>= txhash equalverify

<= /div>
Is that not a recursive c= ovenant? With a little extra work you can also control for amounts and stuf= f.
--0000000000006c662505d6bb857a--