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: <s7r@sky-ip.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B7D05FB3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 20 Dec 2015 11:43:29 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outbound.mailhostbox.com (outbound.mailhostbox.com
[162.222.225.22])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5FD5A0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 20 Dec 2015 11:43:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [0.0.0.0] (unknown [93.174.93.133])
(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
(Authenticated sender: s7r@sky-ip.org)
by outbound.mailhostbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 86CCD78183B;
Sun, 20 Dec 2015 11:43:37 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sky-ip.org;
s=20110108; t=1450611818;
bh=yfhmjBlPoXjYHkg2GZ7KSRU+WTn42EHqzPBWGyxuhc8=;
h=Reply-To:Subject:References:To:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To;
b=bQ3GPIpzvhnHFKfxoKM72cNnf9h5STHqEAR0EWymHiTvZ9kaX4veQhj4j987E0W9B
CcFUeMMw/IAV5mobjtRC52ZhOlX2WoS2/VT+rjwyVRErP8TMl7WmmnVuL3q/cq2wnj
BXKi0ioo2NhZ5tVxYRXwY5B/PcFNisioN7It6gEQ=
Reply-To: s7r@sky-ip.org
References: <50e629572d8de852eb789d50b34da308@xbt.hk>
<1449961269.2210.5.camel@yahoo.com>
<CACrzPenXGQZBrx8QC+1QE2oCE3N=qmfgc_OWrowtjtLjGkZrRA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgQi7aiwyOaVBiMbp6t9D58aFAmDdKPzFiscB6ouGzBK6A@mail.gmail.com>
<20151220112454.GB16187@muck>
<CADm_Wca0cWRvcVaJ+p47A49yffQ1vP=u4807j7axn=mdBdsUGQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@gmail.com>, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
From: s7r <s7r@sky-ip.org>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Message-ID: <56769453.4060903@sky-ip.org>
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 13:43:15 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADm_Wca0cWRvcVaJ+p47A49yffQ1vP=u4807j7axn=mdBdsUGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-CMAE-Score: 0
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=W7WYLUik c=1 sm=1 tr=0
a=DLnS8E+9DKeiaAAUnOny6w==:117 a=DLnS8E+9DKeiaAAUnOny6w==:17
a=N659UExz7-8A:10 a=hkgX1uSMAkJQHbajC78A:9 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,URIBL_BLACK autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 15:14:48 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Forget dormant UTXOs without confiscating bitcoin
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: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 11:43:29 -0000
What will be the actual effect over wallets?
Say I have the private key for a dormant UTXO older than the
consensus-critical maximum UTXO age. The UTXO is not part of the cache.
So I setup a full node and import my old private key (wallet.dat). Will
I even see the correct balance (where will it get if from, since it's
dropped from the cache), or it will show me a 0 balance?
If I can see the correct balance, where can I get the proof I need and
what ensures I'll always be able to get that proof?
On 12/20/2015 1:34 PM, Jeff Garzik via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 6:24 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
>
> What I proprosed is that a consensus-critical maximum UTXO age be part
> of the protocol; UTXO's younger than that age are expected to be cached.
> For UTXO's older than that age, they can be dropped from the cache,
> however to spend them you are required to provide the proof, and that
> proof counts as blockchain space to account for the fact that they do
> need to be broadcast on the network.
>
>
> Yes, this is almost what -has- to happen in the long term.
>
> Ideally we should start having wallets generate those proofs now, and
> then introduce the max-age as a second step as a planned hard fork a
> couple years down the line.
>
> However,
> 1) There is also the open question of "grandfathered" UTXOs - for those
> wallets generated in 2009, buried in a landfill and then dug out 10
> years ago
>
> 2) This reverses the useful minimization attribute of HD wallets - "just
> backup the seed"
>
>
|
