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
|
Return-Path: <eric@voskuil.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7817AB1F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 17 Nov 2016 01:41:51 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pg0-f45.google.com (mail-pg0-f45.google.com [74.125.83.45])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B03C123E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 17 Nov 2016 01:41:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pg0-f45.google.com with SMTP id p66so85344901pga.2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 16 Nov 2016 17:41:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent
:mime-version:in-reply-to;
bh=xk9CZRs4vZZ9Nfx+gmbO+OeJI0vIFJ/Yw6wAu0+fiQI=;
b=MGCRig5NXCNTMt7qxTyOCJUhCtsRgI3PtKaVSMKUWmndVdMCWiOEgkuNKDbTh5vjzv
H24y2CpY8OAyBcEN6SfF33MuUPuHC9QJhGpnPDQYMOxTykWLi2Tt2yhvtqFZ3fdMPf3Y
qVW8uJNx+5UPykOKKe9c9a0vwYLmR+GF9hpYpNeut+EhWjf6nFObXWqOy3NUjHSoFFMd
F5dvV1xNLWdEv1YznrIA4UbtVvKV3h+cN95lumFpn3Ha1XOh+iwGPuoeIWbK7FNibS3Y
7hvKjfkeC5t6CI6KNA7n4pGQZm+LkekPg6tPVAMhX/NBie5RWYGY794hCCWhp/ARO8de
B7SA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date
:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to;
bh=xk9CZRs4vZZ9Nfx+gmbO+OeJI0vIFJ/Yw6wAu0+fiQI=;
b=dLaL4KP0KPXcZsqtNf89zUvb+jmL1g8WpYgJY3fdkK03rL1IyiTiy0BKcOSBspnJoo
ukycbknWdSjhcJLv5Rgtt4A0G/ZfHn992R2BVlDvUAPI4MOnhR69mMvJx70foWDXr78g
EysSFG8MS7WP8ow3guyVtlLoO8gNu4yTdk01d6z95LPEyZs2N7R1uB/I0jDA0o//Nsnq
ijTgfd9+f3DFWyfFllc0ZRicRY/hsPkJT0WmuB0RcAZHuFSotLYTd8pIg8L3etRqWj2s
l1tOjhYLfQRx+VpMwCEZ7Ohp8HcYjef8WwpR2qfo95jxMdDfHPd9E/ZFp7hj7/+IdABi
GzpA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvd0lAWgrLFb1QmDRKzMZQSuq4NidJGpZL8cPaAI+7dLgS1VYGjW8Co0xf0vq9kqUg==
X-Received: by 10.98.35.5 with SMTP id j5mr912656pfj.91.1479346910388;
Wed, 16 Nov 2016 17:41:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:600:9000:d69e:8084:4206:2529:776d?
([2601:600:9000:d69e:8084:4206:2529:776d])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q26sm644545pfk.94.2016.11.16.17.41.49
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Wed, 16 Nov 2016 17:41:49 -0800 (PST)
To: Alex Morcos <morcos@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
References: <CAFp6fsGmynRXLCqKAA+iBXObGOZ2h3DVW8k5L9kSfbPmL1Y-QQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CEDAD65E-512A-43CA-9BD6-56F7D9E6897C@voskuil.org>
<CADJgMzunxU2-7Z_ZPafNY4BPRu0x9oeh6v2dg0nUYqxJbXeGYA@mail.gmail.com>
<33BFC318-0BB4-48DB-B5DC-08247FAC6E5A@voskuil.org>
<CADL_X_dJ8YuDevKR4xA+PTy9D089dAeZ1F3ZwSYG6MrMvkLweg@mail.gmail.com>
<A98BB7F2-7AE2-4D84-9F38-7E7E9D5D3210@voskuil.org>
<e86b5b85-591d-5342-6a75-3ebd501f1789@thomaskerin.io>
<CABm2gDqy+iBdw3W2dap8rdi5TD-5_VSmFnakvEbYeAtgpdLgMg@mail.gmail.com>
<6191e5f2-4cc7-b3ff-b4e7-bb7979e24d1f@voskuil.org>
<CAPWm=eWcZZCzKWXkX=sD=cnjTCEGmdN3G_hf85rwy60EAUXUqQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
Message-ID: <6b3837bb-cde9-87e9-5822-5405a6f7e2f7@voskuil.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 17:41:51 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/45.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPWm=eWcZZCzKWXkX=sD=cnjTCEGmdN3G_hf85rwy60EAUXUqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature";
boundary="ac3e87AfqrkFTSACU5OIeg0qMVVa9Figa"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE 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: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 02:13:44 +0000
Cc: Thomas Kerin <me@thomaskerin.io>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP Proposal] Buried Deployments
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 01:41:51 -0000
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--ac3e87AfqrkFTSACU5OIeg0qMVVa9Figa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 11/16/2016 05:24 PM, Alex Morcos wrote:
> huh?
> can you give an example of how a duplicate transaction hash (in the sam=
e
> chain) can happen given BIP34?
"The pigeonhole principle arises in computer science. For example,
collisions are inevitable in a hash table because the number of possible
keys exceeds the number of indices in the array. A hashing algorithm, no
matter how clever, cannot avoid these collisions."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigeonhole_principle
e
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Eric Voskuil via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>=20
> On 11/16/2016 03:58 PM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Thomas Kerin via bitcoin-dev
> > <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
> >> BIP30 actually was given similar treatment after a reasonable am=
ount of time
> >> had passed.
> >> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp#L239=
2
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp#L2392>=
> >
> > This is not really the same. BIP30 is not validated after BIP34 i=
s
> > active because blocks complying with BIP34 will always necessaril=
y
> > comply with BIP30 (ie coinbases cannot be duplicated after they
> > include the block height).
>=20
> This is a misinterpretation of BIP30. Duplicate transaction hashes =
can
> and will happen and are perfectly valid in Bitcoin. BIP34 does not
> prevent this.
>=20
> e
--ac3e87AfqrkFTSACU5OIeg0qMVVa9Figa
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYLQrfAAoJEDzYwH8LXOFOkgEH/2z1PztastNzvjKcL2P735rB
jkNDYwGgyPKywfsV+tP28CABA3uP/HPT8LHxvfc9LWt09CaXSf5xDHml8eod5Q48
e2BGuF9yRyCgOtfenijSLi+rIqQ3CXyVplD1lA1dZqkRYBmZ28Vh98StihhbF3Vc
hv4b7KjZQbLPjYYJOUqebjH77ebKqkGEbXAxQCl9AyEQgHF8eRDd2cfVN3j2KvH/
Obzzem+wlh+7YLYc+4k4geaaElTOrqTZeaAsdEHDEUZfqVYauji09XKSRRqRFdv2
3giOdbSNIy33stmXWW3S+Yz6pZi/ApB5IZEPf+XuH3BRyGKJlwF+OzNZal+qNgk=
=NrSo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--ac3e87AfqrkFTSACU5OIeg0qMVVa9Figa--
|
