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
|
Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49EBC86
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 24 Aug 2015 02:23:09 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-lb0-f181.google.com (mail-lb0-f181.google.com
[209.85.217.181])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59B46E5
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 24 Aug 2015 02:23:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by lbbpu9 with SMTP id pu9so71295580lbb.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=tq2HdfcJFOu2+E1fgpFL4SBr/6qdyBAvXahywTDmuqw=;
b=BYWAHz3lna4RIZNoN+DcO9TtsTtyuYf7lA+gJ+41aPIjLwyk3oDad8bnYXfbhkEDYi
NZuxHNeC1mh+cqwP66eiqztBXNN9ZolVneEkRl5i4cqZbzJorlZlT+Ek0stxppbri33U
V4wo3khSMZ518glBA7baXTXBuZpVm8pViOLZSXeYaIAaZG9z/Zp7ocSByEof4sxKG49x
bxLiajUwTPl//Rmg7Tx/kGHvfpWiAKAaZprzkEB94UsHIeQgDPpXqsxzu/P9dtDI2ONv
7ciCU3HxHuZlcr0nOrvnPQ8mn3a0nVBv8H5GqkNV2hqNW2R6VHbaHPc52Na+Tq7LCla/
3g1Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlQSR7vpkHe+Zy8Balx9vax2YhWHia5PoGXMC9UZTfhp77hVzCAvdhXcfwn2xwkHBxXVSfE
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.219.3 with SMTP id pk3mr18091314lac.114.1440382985311;
Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.15.22 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgQKQpHu-nC1uSrigDx2JLUt64p-LqidVmiuULDE0MJCFQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADJgMztgE_GkbrsP7zCEHNPA3P6T=aSFfhkcN-q=gVhWP0vKXg@mail.gmail.com>
<CADJgMzv8G3EqLBwEYRHJZ+fO_Jwzy0koi2pJ_iNRkXmoVarGcg@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDod9z6ksgaCv86qFCyKLTQSL3+oNns+__5H77hVhs05DQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAOG=w-sbOcaogkic2i4A5eZnBQ79LUibsGy0dyKyvQg53ktY1Q@mail.gmail.com>
<55DA6470.9040301@thinlink.com>
<CAAS2fgQKQpHu-nC1uSrigDx2JLUt64p-LqidVmiuULDE0MJCFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 04:23:05 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDqW7OGuyZ1BTTeeivDf9wFVsAK9AaGYm8XWwLb2O2Lb+g@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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] [BIP-draft] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - An opcode for
relative locktime
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: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 02:23:09 -0000
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Seperately, to Mark and Btcdrank: Adding an extra wrinkel to the
> discussion has any thought been given to represent one block with more
> than one increment? This would leave additional space for future
> signaling, or allow, for example, higher resolution numbers for a
> sharechain commitement.
No, I don't think anybody thought about this. I just explained this to
Pieter using "for example, 10 instead of 1".
He suggested 600 increments so that it is more similar to timestamps.
|
