public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>,
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP draft: OP_CHECKBLOCKATHEIGHT
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 12:18:17 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160923161817.GA22926@fedora-21-dvm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201609230957.03138.luke@dashjr.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1239 bytes --]

On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 09:57:01AM +0000, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> This BIP describes a new opcode (OP_CHECKBLOCKATHEIGHT) for the Bitcoin 
> scripting system to address reissuing bitcoin transactions when the coins they 
> spend have been conflicted/double-spent.
> 
> https://github.com/luke-jr/bips/blob/bip-cbah/bip-cbah.mediawiki
> 
> Does this seem like a good idea/approach?

Your BIP is a bit confusing: you say "In some circumstances, users may wish to
spend received bitcoins before they have confirmed on the blockchain", but what
you're really referring to isn't spending unconfirmed outputs - which
OP_CHECKBLOCKATHEIGHT can't protect - but rather spending outputs with a small
number of confirmations.

In the existing ecosystem, if multi-block reorgs were a regular event Bitcoin
would be in a lot of trouble; since they're rare, advising wallet authors to
simply refuse to make transactions for some time after such a reorg may be a
better solution. After all, a multi-block reorg is a strong indication that
there's somehting very wrong with the network, and it'd be safer to stop using
Bitcoin for awhile until things settle down.

-- 
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 455 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-09-23 16:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-23  9:57 [bitcoin-dev] BIP draft: OP_CHECKBLOCKATHEIGHT Luke Dashjr
2016-09-23 13:43 ` Russell O'Connor
     [not found]   ` <CAAS2fgQGC695mkyze+mVTZZoQN1mh+1y32u-D6Yv1R7nXWPDcg@mail.gmail.com>
2016-09-23 18:57     ` Gregory Maxwell
2016-09-23 20:02       ` Peter Todd
2016-09-23 22:20   ` Luke Dashjr
2016-09-23 23:43     ` Gregory Maxwell
2016-09-23 14:37 ` Tom
2016-09-23 22:34   ` Luke Dashjr
2016-09-24  0:08     ` Dave Scotese
2016-09-24  9:37     ` Tom
2016-09-23 16:18 ` Peter Todd [this message]
2016-10-01  4:01 ` Rusty Russell
2016-10-01  5:02   ` Luke Dashjr
2016-10-05  2:15     ` Nathan Cook

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=20160923161817.GA22926@fedora-21-dvm \
    --to=pete@petertodd.org \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=luke@dashjr.org \
    /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