1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pete@petertodd.org>) id 1UjBsn-0006Ex-Vo
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 02 Jun 2013 17:15:54 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
designates 62.13.149.43 as permitted sender)
client-ip=62.13.149.43; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
helo=outmail149043.authsmtp.co.uk;
Received: from outmail149043.authsmtp.co.uk ([62.13.149.43])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1UjBsm-0003rz-Mb for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 02 Jun 2013 17:15:53 +0000
Received: from mail-c226.authsmtp.com (mail-c226.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.226])
by punt9.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/Kp) with ESMTP id r52HFkMe089539
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sun, 2 Jun 2013 18:15:46 +0100 (BST)
Received: from savin (76-10-178-109.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.178.109])
(authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id r52HFe22017314
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO)
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sun, 2 Jun 2013 18:15:42 +0100 (BST)
Resent-From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2013 13:15:39 -0400
Resent-Message-ID: <20130602171539.GA18108@savin>
Resent-To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2013 02:13:27 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Gavin <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20130602061327.GA14148@savin>
References: <20130601193036.GA13873@savin>
<38A06794-B6B4-45F3-99C1-24B08434536D@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <38A06794-B6B4-45F3-99C1-24B08434536D@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: 0e4f0aee-cba8-11e2-98a9-0025907ec6c5
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVJwpGK10IU0Fd
P1hXKl1LNVAaWXld WiVPGEoXDxgzCjYj NEgGOBsDNw4AXwd1
Kg0XXVBSFQZ4ABQL BxsUVhs8cANYeX5u ZEFqQHFbVVt/fUFi
QwAWEG9+EzJiamAe V0NZc01TeQVCMB8Q bgZ/BSZYfDZVN3J9
RlY+ZXVgbTwObXwN GFxcdQ0fShgAQygG SkJKLh8uAUYCRiN2
IxE4J1obBEMcNFkH eWM7XkofKBYWWEVF GE9RRSFePVpJWy1j
CApZUCxWGTtMRiFR RxYhJFpTGjFUVmJf GVddVg0UQz5DSzFF
TjpUWCkgRFYuPQpz anxXOwU2EB4lIwAA
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1020:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 76.10.178.109/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
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 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
X-Headers-End: 1UjBsm-0003rz-Mb
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: soft-fork to make
anyone-can-spend outputs unspendable for 100 blocks
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2013 17:15:54 -0000
--k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 10:32:07PM -0400, Gavin wrote:
> Feels like a new opcode might be better.
>=20
> Eg <data> 100 OP_NOP1
>=20
> ... Where op_nop1 is redefined to be 'verify depth' ...=20
Good idea.
Either way, looks like complex announce-commit logic isn't needed and a
simple txout with one of a few possible forms will work.
I'd say we tell people to sacrifice to (provably) unspendable for now
and do a soft-fork later if there is real demand for this stuff in the
future.
> On Jun 1, 2013, at 3:30 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
>=20
> > Currently the most compact way (proof-size) to sacrifice Bitcoins that
> > does not involve making them unspendable is to create a anyone-can-spend
> > output as the last txout in the coinbase of a block:
> >=20
> > scriptPubKey: <data> OP_TRUE
> >=20
> > The proof is then the SHA256 midstate, the txout, and the merkle path to
> > the block header. However this mechanism needs miner support, and it is
> > not possible to pay for such a sacrifice securely, or create an
> > assurance contract to create one.
> >=20
> > A anyone-can-spend in a regular txout is another option, but there is no
> > way to prevent a miner from including a transaction spending that txout
> > in the same block. Once that happens, there is no way to prove the miner
> > didn't create both, thus invalidating the sacrifice. The announce-commit
> > protocol solves that problem, but at the cost of a much larger proof,
> > especially if multiple parties want to get together to pay the cost of
> > the sacrifice. (the proof must include the entire tx used to make the
> > sacrifice)
> >=20
> > However if we add a rule where txouts ending in OP_TRUE are unspendable
> > for 100 blocks, similar to coinbases, we fix these problems. The rule
> > can be done as a soft-fork with 95% support in the same way the
> > blockheight rule was implemented. Along with that change
> > anyone-can-spend outputs should be make IsStandard() so they will be
> > relayed.
> >=20
> > The alternative is sacrifices to unspendable outputs, which is very
> > undesirable compared to sending the money to miners to further
> > strengthen the security of the network.
> >=20
> > We should always make it easy for people to write code that does what is
> > best for Bitcoin.
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
0000000000000092f448c7630e47584650efa7e27604161c0b5984d603d944ea
--k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJRquKHAAoJECSBQD2l8JH7gwUIAKzonCjRemkq0u/9LGpXMA+p
yBJc3gLCHhuWpuZiQslY87eEVRdx97ZS4Rlq29tt0qVcIZzrNTT8TuCjOMhPcK+n
w4jTu6YbK8k9t9LjHG6+XRF3f186zoeKtCo6drCy98s9AvLBr9eMElEqmVJWkI3u
yPP5T6aiyN2hzTXiRhxBBqQOgaNRzr2B+yRY2kzIWaUhe2qPi9Gd00oS3SYAXD7O
CkATyCDf7EiaO3lChqlUodkcQod8wp7PfFScwv+Q+RXSYAgskPTrwHTJuQCFabjO
03zav9Rvt0fGOE2uVpI3Uob85vSlK04XGTtC/MAAbYN+Y1/VvsnFnEC3uiW6Tpk=
=jlxA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G--
|
