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
|
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 <luke@dashjr.org>) id 1RumbK-0000UZ-Vq
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:04:58 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([173.242.112.54])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1RumbF-0002gj-42 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:04:58 +0000
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (fl-184-4-164-217.dhcp.embarqhsd.net
[184.4.164.217]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6F3115607E7;
Tue, 7 Feb 2012 15:04:47 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 10:04:36 -0500
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.2.2-gentoo; KDE/4.7.4; x86_64; ; )
References: <CABsx9T0-eMkfJiOL_2VN5TUuvs_fYANa3XXoM5OX4AMP1W2iSA@mail.gmail.com>
<201202061054.26448.luke@dashjr.org>
In-Reply-To: <201202061054.26448.luke@dashjr.org>
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: CE5A D56A 36CC 69FA E7D2 3558 665F C11D D53E 9583
X-PGP-Key-ID: 665FC11DD53E9583
X-PGP-Keyserver: x-hkp://subkeys.pgp.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201202071004.37615.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
X-Headers-End: 1RumbF-0002gj-42
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Version 0.6 release candidate 1 plan
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: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:04:59 -0000
On Monday, February 06, 2012 10:54:25 AM Luke-Jr wrote:
> > 769 : Make transactions with extra data in scriptSig non-standard
>
> If this affects relaying, it will significantly harm the ability to replace
> the current spammy "green address" scheme with a sensible extra signature
> system. On the miner end, it could significantly harm adoption of such a
> system.
FWIW, at least MtGox was OK with the plan to move to non-blockchain-spam
0-confirmation via an extra signature. Why do you ignore this possibility, and
merge stuff that will break it? Do you have an alternative solution to the
problem of green addresses spamming the blockchain? As I noted in the pull
request, stripping extra data has no negative impact on normal transactions,
and clients creating these can be written to expect the txnid to change (or
simply not care what the txnid is).
|
