Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B791AD0 for ; Tue, 21 May 2019 19:47:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 00:06:24 by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail.bluematt.me (mail.bluematt.me [69.59.18.99]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9563327B for ; Tue, 21 May 2019 19:47:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:2620:6e:a000:233::100] (unknown [IPv6:2620:6e:a000:233::100]) by mail.bluematt.me (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 174A11203A1; Tue, 21 May 2019 19:41:24 +0000 (UTC) To: Jeremy , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion References: From: Matt Corallo Message-ID: <80353196-0f32-0e7b-d048-bd870e30029c@mattcorallo.com> Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 19:41:22 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 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: Wed, 22 May 2019 13:30:30 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Congestion Control via OP_CHECKOUTPUTSHASHVERIFY proposal 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: Tue, 21 May 2019 19:47:52 -0000 If we're going to do covenants (and I think we should), then I think we need to have a flexible solution that provides more features than just this, or we risk adding it only to go through all the effort again when people ask for a better solution. Matt On 5/20/19 8:58 PM, Jeremy via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Hello bitcoin-devs, > > Below is a link to a BIP Draft for a new opcode, > OP_CHECKOUTPUTSHASHVERIFY. This opcode enables an easy-to-use trustless > congestion control techniques via a rudimentary, limited form of > covenant which does not bear the same technical and social risks of > prior covenant designs. > > Congestion control allows Bitcoin users to confirm payments to many > users in a single transaction without creating the UTXO on-chain until a > later time. This therefore improves the throughput of confirmed > payments, at the expense of latency on spendability and increased > average block space utilization. The BIP covers this use case in detail, > and a few other use cases lightly. > > The BIP draft is here: > https://github.com/JeremyRubin/bips/blob/op-checkoutputshashverify/bip-coshv.mediawiki > > The BIP proposes to deploy the change simultaneously with Taproot as an > OPSUCCESS, but it could be deployed separately if needed. > > An initial reference implementation of the consensus changes and  tests > which demonstrate how to use it for basic congestion control is > available at > https://github.com/JeremyRubin/bitcoin/tree/congestion-control.  The > changes are about 74 lines of code on top of sipa's Taproot reference > implementation. > > Best regards, > > Jeremy Rubin > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >