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
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
|
Return-Path: <cryptaxe@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8164BD7D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 6 Aug 2018 01:55:03 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wr1-f44.google.com (mail-wr1-f44.google.com
[209.85.221.44])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B934C1A0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 6 Aug 2018 01:55:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wr1-f44.google.com with SMTP id f12-v6so10779368wrv.12
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 05 Aug 2018 18:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=IWalwU1XomXuEjWmo5mJ8IEzWiPW4NlJZ3Ow8LNh1s8=;
b=qqlKqJpLx3PA0NOlCnq2+n9WK5FiXHo2iwlR9LeAVT2zqPTTojadUL3QaNLB8Pxci7
QAWt80KAQwJKVWSRJABSzA4Ax7lO/eLpILdOi5hoRfKHl4OB3zrdQwvAcmMGIcMNQhGH
VPBNC/lsvQlwdaypuOSkA9zWUEfJlOvnh/tOrBz4xlBfXNQQ54tBL+sNiK9fqJAnuLtn
vWnxuxlcc8ZQtLDpMhWPCD2QxqFsG4ELvxcrSsOGLNV5GSET+KGrQ3MymvbhLTMtBzWA
jOz+CB+T+iMQCIfwGaCBas8XfUO1Bqc/FOt2YsxPTHUT7Z0/4iWSyf4t++8v+LAZAniP
P4Lw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
:message-id:subject:to;
bh=IWalwU1XomXuEjWmo5mJ8IEzWiPW4NlJZ3Ow8LNh1s8=;
b=btsB39gEr0fClGAFn1fFUJqwU5qt6+zz1d2TTQr7jkceF3V9XdYpuV1XJiZD2vF7Fg
5casWcWg8QSyVi3Md1ghCczBjqakh9+WawtrnFq7IXeFk51FGWqQbQvZMQiHAFZmhqUy
+rRSLVJCBQyrWYGXxuGBu16iHNJW8m/wukpT1iwUZMVaq3U8xwzp9n/72SZh7F+NqWrX
x/ZzFOoErFXnC3vgyrRQDMezun4gCZG6SdgQ4IO0U54QhT0pnoKWSeNh18q2BVF5Sipu
4AyVjE7EulKBcT0nAZGbYk/qZEXmtgIOC6K1nV/9OV6EpHXskcu8ua0SotTlW4Woj7WY
rSKA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFyVcE0LiFv5wxUPRkYyZ/oqGhaJysHzjQIOg0L3+j1HPiinwQi
aRsgj4xYPkPMav9PDsMlexH2NXxTfjROxzP9Tjw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpeIVkSkoDwkuvkHtcZIkgI9Dk9aNqaMnqbj6e7PZzju3cNZSNATOe3rpQWoZjboEFOTBk8Opgz6/hNDNnZgj5U=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:8541:: with SMTP id
59-v6mr7794212wrh.223.1533520501318;
Sun, 05 Aug 2018 18:55:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAK6DEspS1+LWwJgbVfWaM3gHwmhYPGBuV+dLPATe--QwmUUa2Q@mail.gmail.com>
<F6AA346D-4AF5-4838-A91F-44FAF74A55E9@petertodd.org>
<CAK6DEsp=1A61kK5K+8xZOX3wSiUhRdVoTm5nUu9dYY3C1CsPnA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAK6DEsp=1A61kK5K+8xZOX3wSiUhRdVoTm5nUu9dYY3C1CsPnA@mail.gmail.com>
From: CryptAxe <cryptaxe@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2018 18:54:50 -0700
Message-ID: <CAF5CFkjxs4KBGJvpzhsyCRfdu-EGXS3mUyVPntnpNLO3cRW+xQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: lautaro.dragan@gmail.com, Lautaro Dragan <lautarodragan@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bca7ba0572ba90b9"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
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: Mon, 06 Aug 2018 01:57:55 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Claiming an OP_RETURN Prefix
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: Mon, 06 Aug 2018 01:55:03 -0000
--000000000000bca7ba0572ba90b9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Don't worry about claiming it. There are no reserved prefixes enforced by
the software. For example anyone could create an output that uses the
witness coinbase commitment prefix bytes. It would just be ignored (unless
it was in the coinbase, in which case it would also need to be valid).
On Sun, Aug 5, 2018, 6:47 PM Lautaro Dragan via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Thanks Peter for your prompt reply.
>
> And now that I think of it you're right - as easy as it is for us to
> differentiate OP_RETURN outputs that contain the Po.et prefix it would be
> for miners to block those transactions altogether. Is this what you mean?
>
> Still, a prefix is something we may have to live with for a little while
> until we can address that issue.
>
> Is there a formal / standard process to claim it we should follow?
>
>
>
>
> El dom., 5 de ago. de 2018 a la(s) 20:58, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
> escribi=C3=B3:
>
>>
>>
>> On August 5, 2018 9:11:26 PM UTC, Lautaro Dragan via bitcoin-dev <
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> >Hi everyone,
>> >
>> >My name's Lautaro and I'm currently acting as Tech Lead of Po.et
>> ><https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/OP_RETURN#OP_RETURN_prefixes>. At Po.et we
>> >use
>> >colored coins
>> ><
>> https://github.com/poetapp/node/blob/3c905bc5dbd3722ad39ac68041d9f2a099e=
5e84c/src/BlockchainWriter/ClaimController.ts#L101-L110
>> >
>> >to
>> >store data on the Bitcoin blockchain with prefix "POET".
>> >
>> >I've read in an old version of the OP_RETURN entry of the bitcoin wiki
>> ><https://en.bitcoin.it/w/index.php?title=3DOP_RETURN&oldid=3D62560> tha=
t
>> >*protocols
>> >wishing to claim OP_RETURN prefixes should use the standard Bitcoin
>> >Improvement Proposals process*.
>> >
>> >That entry seems to have changed recently
>> ><https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/OP_RETURN#OP_RETURN_prefixes>, no longer
>> >stating that we should follow the BIP process, and I haven't been able
>> >to
>> >find any existing BIP claiming an OP_RETURN prexif, but for the sake of
>> >thoroughness I'd like to ask for your help or confirmation here.
>> >
>> >Should we actually be using the BIP process to claim a prefix?
>>
>> It's better if you don't use a prefix at all from a censorship resistanc=
e
>> and anonymity perspective; you're application should not require a prefi=
x
>> for technical reasons.
>>
>> --
>> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
>>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
--000000000000bca7ba0572ba90b9
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"auto">Don't worry about claiming it. There are no reserved =
prefixes enforced by the software. For example anyone could create an outpu=
t that uses the witness coinbase commitment prefix bytes. It would just be =
ignored (unless it was in the coinbase, in which case it would also need to=
be valid).=C2=A0</div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr">On S=
un, Aug 5, 2018, 6:47 PM Lautaro Dragan via bitcoin-dev <<a href=3D"mail=
to:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation=
.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"mar=
gin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr=
">Thanks Peter for your prompt reply.=C2=A0<div><br></div><div>And now that=
I think of it you're right - as easy as it is for us to differentiate =
OP_RETURN outputs that contain the Po.et prefix it would be for miners to b=
lock those transactions altogether. Is this what you mean?</div><div><br></=
div><div>Still, a prefix is something we may have to live with for a little=
while until we can address that issue.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>Is t=
here a formal / standard process to claim it we should follow?</div><div><b=
r></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><=
div dir=3D"ltr">El dom., 5 de ago. de 2018 a la(s) 20:58, Peter Todd <<a=
href=3D"mailto:pete@petertodd.org" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"noreferrer">pe=
te@petertodd.org</a>> escribi=C3=B3:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail=
_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:=
1ex"><br>
<br>
On August 5, 2018 9:11:26 PM UTC, Lautaro Dragan via bitcoin-dev <<a hre=
f=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D=
"noreferrer">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>Hi everyone,<br>
><br>
>My name's Lautaro and I'm currently acting as Tech Lead of Po.e=
t<br>
><<a href=3D"https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/OP_RETURN#OP_RETURN_prefixes"=
rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki=
/OP_RETURN#OP_RETURN_prefixes</a>>. At Po.et we<br>
>use<br>
>colored coins<br>
><<a href=3D"https://github.com/poetapp/node/blob/3c905bc5dbd3722ad39=
ac68041d9f2a099e5e84c/src/BlockchainWriter/ClaimController.ts#L101-L110" re=
l=3D"noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/poetapp/no=
de/blob/3c905bc5dbd3722ad39ac68041d9f2a099e5e84c/src/BlockchainWriter/Claim=
Controller.ts#L101-L110</a>><br>
>to<br>
>store data on the Bitcoin blockchain with prefix "POET".<br>
><br>
>I've read in an old version of the OP_RETURN entry of the bitcoin w=
iki<br>
><<a href=3D"https://en.bitcoin.it/w/index.php?title=3DOP_RETURN&=
oldid=3D62560" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://en.b=
itcoin.it/w/index.php?title=3DOP_RETURN&oldid=3D62560</a>> that<br>
>*protocols<br>
>wishing to claim OP_RETURN prefixes should use the standard Bitcoin<br>
>Improvement Proposals process*.<br>
><br>
>That entry seems to have changed recently<br>
><<a href=3D"https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/OP_RETURN#OP_RETURN_prefixes"=
rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki=
/OP_RETURN#OP_RETURN_prefixes</a>>, no longer<br>
>stating that we should follow the BIP process, and I haven't been a=
ble<br>
>to<br>
>find any existing BIP claiming an OP_RETURN prexif, but for the sake of=
<br>
>thoroughness I'd like to ask for your help or confirmation here.<br=
>
><br>
>Should we actually be using the BIP process to claim a prefix?<br>
<br>
It's better if you don't use a prefix at all from a censorship resi=
stance and anonymity perspective; you're application should not require=
a prefix for technical reasons.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
<a href=3D"https://petertodd.org" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_=
blank">https://petertodd.org</a> 'peter'[:-1]@<a href=3D"http://pet=
ertodd.org" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">petertodd.org</=
a><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank" =
rel=3D"noreferrer">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundati=
on.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
--000000000000bca7ba0572ba90b9--
|
