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
|
Return-Path: <jl2012@xbt.hk>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC6621264
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:12:29 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from s47.web-hosting.com (s47.web-hosting.com [199.188.200.16])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8415D140
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:12:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost ([::1]:38014 helo=server47.web-hosting.com)
by server47.web-hosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.85)
(envelope-from <jl2012@xbt.hk>)
id 1ZcriW-001viA-49; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 05:12:28 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8;
format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 05:12:27 -0400
From: jl2012@xbt.hk
To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADJgMzupLGVKfHnkAwJYUeAe-XHKtc0o7d8G3-2N1Ls5orfS=Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a50b82c156c805a284386d80a42cc926@xbt.hk>
<CAOG=w-vGqsAcw5vdY8SaGVe4Q6XX1J=GCsZftWgjES_N_5c2pA@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDp_afyqskEV8QmO43=-6R_2OJm36GVQxcQO_3ao2jC1gw@mail.gmail.com>
<C9A1D16E-03F7-4860-8E9B-32A98E06CE49@petertodd.org>
<014345a983eabf243d9ce127de0dff7c@xbt.hk>
<CADJgMzupLGVKfHnkAwJYUeAe-XHKtc0o7d8G3-2N1Ls5orfS=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <bc31c9283aa0ae5a1bcb6dedaff8b23d@xbt.hk>
X-Sender: jl2012@xbt.hk
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.0.5
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse,
please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server47.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - xbt.hk
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server47.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id:
jl2012@xbt.hk
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fill-or-kill transaction
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:12:30 -0000
Btc Drak 於 2015-09-18 02:42 寫到:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 4:27 AM, jl2012 via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> Btc Drak 於 2015-09-17 15:12 寫到:
>>
>>> Forgive me if I have missed the exact use-case, but this seems
>>> overly
>>> complex. Surely fill-or-kill refers to getting a transaction
>>> confirmed
>>> within a few confirms or to drop the tx from the mempool so it
>>> wont be
>>> considered for inclusion anymore. As such, you could just
>>> repurpose a
>>> small range of nLocktime such that a TX will be accepted into
>>> mempool
>>> for a specific period before expiring.
>>
>> What I'm describing is to implement fill-or-kill as consensus rule.
>> Certainly, we could implement it at the P2P network level:
>> everything is the same as I described, but the nLockTime2 and
>> nKillTime are for reference only and tx validity depends only on the
>> nLockTime. Benevolent miners should drop the tx after the suggested
>> kill time but there is no guarantee
>
> Sure, you can make the scheme I describe consensus based by adding the
> rule tx is not valid to mine after expiry: this still keeps the
> simplicity I described.
If you simply redefine a range of unused nLockTime as nKillTime, users
will be constrained to use either nLockTime or nKillTime, but not both
in the same tx.
If we are willing to scarify a large range of tx nVersion, say
10-15bits, the nKillTime data could be embedded there.
Another option is nSequence, which will allow per-input nKillTime and
nLockTime.
The cleanest way, of course, is a hardfork to add a new nKillTime field
to the tx so people could use nLockTime and nKillTime in parallel.
|
