public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Danny Thorpe <danny.thorpe@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [RFC] Canonical input and output ordering in transactions
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 17:36:11 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150608213611.GB19826@muck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJN5wHVSK-oW+zVZmEMfyFkd+GUHRhFHEjEmKrdvqas3LzY0zw@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 969 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 02:25:40PM -0700, Danny Thorpe wrote:
> FWIW, The Open Assets colored coin protocol (CoinPrism) places special
> significance on the zeroth input and the position of the OP_RETURN colored
> coin marker output to distinguish colored coin issuance outputs from
> transfer outputs. Reordering the inputs or the outputs breaks the colored
> coin representation.
> 
> Recommending sorting of the inputs and outputs as a best practice is fine
> (and better than random, IMO), but not as part of IsStandard() or consensus
> rules.  There are cases where the order of the inputs and outputs is
> significant.

Timestamping is another case where order matters: if you put the digest
in the last vout you can use SHA256 midstate's to reduce the size of the
timestamp proof.

Anyway, there's no reason to rush re: changes to IsStandard()

-- 
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
0000000000000000127ab1d576dc851f374424f1269c4700ccaba2c42d97e778

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 650 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2015-06-08 21:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-06-06  4:42 [Bitcoin-development] [RFC] Canonical input and output ordering in transactions Rusty Russell
2015-06-06  4:46 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-06-06  6:44   ` Rusty Russell
2015-06-06  8:24   ` Wladimir J. van der Laan
2015-06-06  9:45     ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-06-08 21:25 ` Danny Thorpe
2015-06-08 21:36   ` Peter Todd [this message]
2015-06-14 23:04   ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-06-14 23:02 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-06-15  2:29   ` Rusty Russell
2015-06-15  2:33     ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-06-15  2:47       ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-06-15 21:01         ` Rusty Russell
2015-06-16  7:10           ` Jorge Timón
2015-06-16  8:06             ` Rusty Russell
     [not found]               ` <CABm2gDpkwHvrsB8Dh-hsO6H9trcweEX9XGB5Jh5KLPsPY5Z1Sw@mail.gmail.com>
2015-06-21  7:27                 ` [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: " Jorge Timón
2015-06-15  4:01   ` [Bitcoin-development] " Kristov Atlas
2015-06-24 22:09     ` [bitcoin-dev] " Kristov Atlas

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150608213611.GB19826@muck \
    --to=pete@petertodd.org \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=danny.thorpe@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox