Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B56CB7B for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 15:45:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-qt0-f176.google.com (mail-qt0-f176.google.com [209.85.216.176]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 004F9E3 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 15:45:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qt0-f176.google.com with SMTP id n21so142329006qta.1 for ; Tue, 04 Apr 2017 08:45:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Va1Tj2dYaTMv0ZS7Lk3qwfyefSdox3Cooz8hb7pX6BE=; b=vPs0hAFR2NqwRdpr2tT+f5LsVeWAFbwhGCGMojn7rpsfS41+n7t7yx/4YSPFjxuMdz cUUgQk9KBKMAC4+Lfuw1NxXvq7pvgDgv3hnNUL3bYMImUzeytSAVOEXSera5TU8hrumr 37P/etsYVeqqAxmt+GwFDtoMOWSF5GhHn3jgPQbjxb3DYRx1iC1Fp397z9gdGuXDHLsX hpSJXnmHwKbFfTGpH2Ji8uq8gMrXDn9JWgzCAjX/heGOXWUimhW333V7avozzUtS5ng6 rxf7jA3RB8QL70YCrQuVKoOL0lDXcBfWUt3D8eIvzxkfc3467VL4U3U/QOt2O+BbTzqF p6WQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=Va1Tj2dYaTMv0ZS7Lk3qwfyefSdox3Cooz8hb7pX6BE=; b=dnuz6CtEClluMi2FPJk/5PUR2tr1Al+Kxxx1wpXdQZx0Qs/B1y2FV7Uv3I/UwHoJif uuJwE2qXEPE2AmLhz3Ciz+OCMCHcdBR5OTeHPP7N9A0tajs163PC5WGh6FPmvOgXDL4C 28Jpb/RNB1p4mFcqIK+q4TY0iPpXu4xRsDAmFlmdl3khwSRSVkQfuaiplXsmi5jyaKlh 1nToRtNMAy+vK7ZtuvUBjjIybOjNxqeDZ6oHTM94htyK9ndh1qP5tMigjW7kV2ys1Cv+ yN6WeyX9t+lwxau0FBTOgRUJkv/Kf3LUuXOfMDGJR1Fd/+6hb3cP7J18jVzNats30HUt oaww== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1V5RpFcr/n41zvD8bEUyVqtV5aHRb7opjXh00jHyiLoG7EH6BfXEqQwqDsbtUsEpYheqTKuePIBvKGQw== X-Received: by 10.200.42.213 with SMTP id c21mr26713153qta.257.1491320701114; Tue, 04 Apr 2017 08:45:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.137.180 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 08:44:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2021960.L2etkeoJTU@strawberry> References: <2D094CEC-3756-45B0-970F-1EB33DF352C5@xbt.hk> <7465915.Qhm6HcGyAn@strawberry> <2021960.L2etkeoJTU@strawberry> From: Greg Sanders Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 11:44:40 -0400 Message-ID: To: Tom Zander , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11370ed4a2e0fb054c59281a X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP draft: Extended block header hardfork 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, 04 Apr 2017 15:45:02 -0000 --001a11370ed4a2e0fb054c59281a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable That's BIP30, he linked BIP34: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/validation.cpp#L3004 On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 11:32 AM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Can you tell me where it is enforced? > > The only place I found was here; > https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/validation.cpp#L1793 > > which doesn=E2=80=99t enforce it, all that code does is check that the tx= id is > unknown or fully spent. > And since the below idea from Russel would change the txid, it would seem > no > full client would reject this. > > Maybe its in a BIP, but I can=E2=80=99t find it in the code. > > On Tuesday, 4 April 2017 16:59:12 CEST James Hilliard wrote: > > It is a consensus rule > > https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0034.mediawiki > > > > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 6:47 AM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev > > > > wrote: > > > On Sunday, 2 April 2017 22:39:13 CEST Russell O'Connor via bitcoin-de= v > > > > > > wrote: > > >> Someone told me a while back that it would be more natural if we mo= ve > > >> the > > >> > > >> nHeight from the coinbase script to the coinbase locktime. Have you > > >> considered doing this? > > > > > > That change would not be a consensus change and thus free to make any > > > day. > > > -- > Tom Zander > Blog: https://zander.github.io > Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > --001a11370ed4a2e0fb054c59281a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 = at 11:32 AM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@l= ists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
Can you tell me where it is enforced?

The only place I found was here;
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/validation.cpp#L1793

which doesn=E2=80=99t enforce it, all that code does is check that the txid= is
unknown or fully spent.
And since the below idea from Russel would change the txid, it would seem n= o
full client would reject this.

Maybe its in a BIP, but I can=E2=80=99t find it in the code.

On Tuesday, 4 April 2017 16:59:12 CEST James Hilliard wrote:
> It is a consensus rule
> https://github.com/bitcoin/b= ips/blob/master/bip-0034.mediawiki
>
> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 6:47 AM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev
>
> <bitcoin-d= ev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Sunday, 2 April 2017 22:39:13 CEST Russell O'Connor via bi= tcoin-dev
> >
> > wrote:
> >>=C2=A0 Someone told me a while back that it would be more natu= ral if we move
> >>=C2=A0 the
> >>
> >> nHeight from the coinbase script to the coinbase locktime.=C2= =A0 Have you
> >> considered doing this?
> >
> > That change would not be a consensus change and thus free to make= any
> > day.


--
Tom Zander
Blog: https://zander.github.io
Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel<= /a>
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.= linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org= /mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

--001a11370ed4a2e0fb054c59281a--