Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18994C002D; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 12:15:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E3F840101; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 12:15:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.8 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=petertodd.org header.b="iDwsZYUl"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b="tZEKEsxF" Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yWdCXn73oFXh; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 12:15:06 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8639F40012; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 12:15:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 413C75C0144; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 08:15:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 28 Apr 2022 08:15:05 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=petertodd.org; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender :subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1651148105; x=1651234505; bh=Pd AZf6u30HPmrLWY207i9ytJHePJXkNkLzgzuW8pTM0=; b=iDwsZYUl8Jt1T7rCtF o6JqqGwhFoUH+sj9cN9eyhWXbGo0r18w2p/KD4PzcrO1fziuh9fr8nm2cDQ2Gzkw 8SNEE2HfRu5NAj1Xv3+oZoCCzzgyzAcG8m3pnLi6DQpnqqZfDl3NdjzfAsusaj6A 1ZvMr0dU0UR0IwPzHRzj11/pXqsHoK5h+kOe3SRf8Bd0GdqwlpzBxfv6H/rZFiYm csqgYxcPIgxHDT/I2VEMKoi/LEhKQqXJIcIhQ4TjOjwMsP3wuF+ZZi81L4OpDzb1 I8R8sk2A6hRsen+KOMknZjUX16u1pBdO2Q+V053QseTdos7OFw6P/mArcuHKXf9s UPYA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1651148105; x= 1651234505; bh=PdAZf6u30HPmrLWY207i9ytJHePJXkNkLzgzuW8pTM0=; b=t ZEKEsxF/GdfVJ72h0X4JqNzd1K1eL36DU8hWNJmttXrKF7PZxzL9qNTTYiVsizd7 j7nUCBIJeA0Zeenry6oI1qpg03U3iNsMVAtQ5RH1zpER2KacNQCloR02Cixj9At1 tIvQCdFO+pmaHWBpslsU1ZdYBgU5wogkq9K0ttGhnBalL/y8g4JC0pKqmQtVDWel pJcnRYrzpWVNnuGSNBf5a1tOfpXX6VSd8bEir3ypgLqpwNvLwoSMnHUxlM0R/a+T tnqQ+g+SC3ImO8cJCnU662L6Dj6TsvjkdE7KRbFvsZEwtbkpNB+Fk20HM01Fmjax mpza7KPePSSm5drMNjOog== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrudejgdehtdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehgtderredttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefrvghtvghr ucfvohguugcuoehpvghtvgesphgvthgvrhhtohguugdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvg hrnhepledvleelffdtudekudffjefgfeejueehieelfedtgfetudetgeegveeutefhjedt necuffhomhgrihhnpehpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepuhhsvghrsehpvghtvghrthhouggurdho rhhg X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 08:15:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 918CD5FAFB; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 08:15:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2022 08:15:02 -0400 From: Peter Todd To: Jeremy Rubin Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="6beR0q5z9Iv1KmW/" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion , lightning-dev , Jeremy Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Pre-BIP] Fee Accounts 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: Thu, 28 Apr 2022 12:15:08 -0000 --6beR0q5z9Iv1KmW/ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Apr 17, 2022 at 01:57:28PM -0700, Jeremy Rubin wrote: > the 'lots of people' stuff (get confused, can't figure out what i'm > quoting, actually are reading this conversation) is an appeal to an > authority that doesn't exist. If something is unclear to you, let me know. > If it's unclear to a supposed existential person or set of persons, they > can let me know. It's pretty simple: bitcoin-dev is read by hundreds of people. This has not= hing to do with authority. It's about not wasting the time of those people. > concretely, I am confused by how OTS can both support RBF for updating to > larger commitments (the reason you're arguing with me) and not have an > epoch based re-comittings scheme and still be correct. My assumption now, > short of a coherent spec that's not just 'read the code', is that OTS > probably is not formally correct and has some holes in what is > committed to, or relies on clients re-requesting proofs if they fail to be > committed. in any case, you would be greatly aided by having an actual sp= ec > for OTS since i'm not interested in the specifics of OTS software, but I'm > willing to look at the protocol. So if you do that, maybe we can talk more > about the issue you see with how sponsors works. OpenTimestamps is, as the name suggests, for cryptographic timestamping. As= is obvious to anyone with a good knowledge of cryptography, a cryptographic timestamp proves that data existed prior to some point in time. That's it. > further, I think that if there is something that sponsors does that could > make a hypothetical OTS-like service work better, in a way that would be > opaque (read: soft-fork like wrt compatibility) to clients, then we should > just change what OTS is rather than committing ourselves to a worse design > in service of some unstated design goals. In particular, it seems that > OTS's servers can be linearized and because old clients aren't looking for > linearization, then the new linearization won't be a breaking change for > old clients, just calendar servers. And new clients can benefit from > linearization. The fact you keep bringing up linearization for a timestmaping service make= s me think something is missing in your understanding of cryptography. Tell me, = how exactly do you think linearization would help in an example use-case? More specifically, what attack would be prevented? --=20 https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org --6beR0q5z9Iv1KmW/ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE0RcYcKRzsEwFZ3N5Lly11TVRLzcFAmJqhUMACgkQLly11TVR LzeGpg/6Aj1Tpq9nEBTQldhdg7K8r08D3Q9mLxKnodcWq3ob5dpkH0i4J4EqWAJo L0gzavOJqTzVeneXeu8cNHW+1Dc2rHqfgMnxIkgeWe1cB3ICb6muonboaL+2X2Zn FXikQxxPAXcjdHvWnlQcYZPmV4wLGjxmOtwXxvOSKdIYyVIdK4hjn2oPu73NtEXR 3U3Q1QuTNp6EjTUYnPTiu6UTEKa5n42HMnMt2NHhvDkc//FFfsUBbWWqIObYN8bO SnsBZepzr7U9skMI5R+2ZWWAVMfzdcFoiZ+eYejv+jP+ZXCawMdXPeu+uqdNNC7P 0+rMedvoavBQuv2V0m8K82wajfe6jV3MJgB7B0Bp4x9ClSYpRCF2Rm+6yJ/Pd8p6 BAMCioh6733jL6xkmvbtADxTjKxK+ywIvM06q7yNqgZUue8mvk8D1kZKuwFwu7Nn kqMPisE6NHo4WnAXAxd/PoZKAn+GqzT1WwEz4xLKOsk9TjH0b2J8uaKikxp2ymfZ ZVwO0+umV9KNRwP39K/i6rvEQQmI4pwnUOHORKiLOPJJlKiSvavTiGlF3Oo2RlR4 TaLFbIuf1BRgw+FC0PiGN648ZWfXx2me485iU8UGPULim+inmx2lmofP+jx/7p1w 7+WezAJrVODp+7qRhUX2/gdIILqtvWJllk9DXWd3H1g1nrI1ZoQ= =IXid -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --6beR0q5z9Iv1KmW/--