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
|
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 65F8C7A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 10 Aug 2015 19:44:45 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f175.google.com (mail-wi0-f175.google.com
[209.85.212.175])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCAA07D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 10 Aug 2015 19:44:44 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wicja10 with SMTP id ja10so49726050wic.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 10 Aug 2015 12:44:43 -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=Wm8OgIzYvuqu8qvPcUgam8BmtLJ4kE+V6ovYipWmgw8=;
b=Z4DWDfUMsCH+E9kIXTIwF5moa3JbrwxQ07Msvmc/l2f6szul9MbNSsXvs+vLRz+/Uu
90deVD/E3NG1UQ29ROa4ma+7VzxFZX5W/5UIQvwHpRutUBA/bWZr0yZUAO9aJFAStWqa
wpNsJW49gfZpCNW96ryU7c4mMtPHwYF4n5PzIzYcf+0UTX1eFtMngTPpICdTAn9OCwRZ
VAafOU5YWEqhdZeFDb3rPcRCcKodGrxuNKrP8ZwYFU1v1PYqyS34CpE1TW6amDMQ/wSY
jYxLmwMRa7VPToZX909iQVDTgiWlU2erqlqnJjKQAcZip67JWgCtZx8q16R67wG/KOIc
tSNQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkkbUK8HvE97G13L17x58j+fI9iVjaDR8ghZj/8G7PZ4EaGtd8bm8UpTiBT2kthaWNxuLcL
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.21.175 with SMTP id w15mr28603151wie.58.1439235883604;
Mon, 10 Aug 2015 12:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.31.230 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 12:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201508101841.00173.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <55C75FC8.6070807@jrn.me.uk> <201508092346.20301.luke@dashjr.org>
<55C8EE2A.3030309@jrn.me.uk> <201508101841.00173.luke@dashjr.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 21:44:43 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDpaYLM0rUZ8QDw_cFnmogsu-FZz5Z5fZOJ_ek4cQti6iw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
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] Alternative chain support for payment protocol
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, 10 Aug 2015 19:44:45 -0000
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> > Genesis blocks are not necessarily unique. For example, Litecoin and
>> > Feathercoin share the same one.
That's a fatal design in Feathercoin, not a mistake all altchains have
done and certainly irrelevant to Bitcoin.
> Regtest isn't really a network at all, just a testing mode of Bitcoin Core...
Regtest is a testchain just like testnet2 and testnet3. Testchains are
the only reason why Bitcoin Core supports multiple chains using
CChainParams.
> Sorry, I meant to stress that BIPs are for *Bitcoin* improvements
> specifically. Things which only improve altcoins, while a perfectly fine thing
> to standardise, are outside the scope of what belongs in a BIP.
>
> Perhaps, however, this could be made to kill 2 birds with one stone, by
> ensuring it addresses the need for payments made of bitcoins on a sidechain?
> For this, a merchant who wants a sidechain payment would presumably be able to
> provide a script from the main chain already, but an extension allowing
> payment directly on the sidechain (at the customer's choice) avoids the need
> to round-trip it...
For the payment protocol testchains, sidechains and altcoins are all
quite similar.
But it is fine to just focus on testchains if sidechains and altcoins
are out of scope.
|
