From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E6AEC01 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 20:02:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [192.3.11.21]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 139DB288 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 20:02:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:5:265:a45d:823b:2d27:961c]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D10FC38ABAA1; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 20:01:11 +0000 (UTC) X-Hashcash: 1:25:170426:jl2012@xbt.hk::8WBsvPNbYEKl5cW+:aEuHG X-Hashcash: 1:25:170426:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::MkX7Bud3rvo0yobE:fvZ7r From: Luke Dashjr To: Johnson Lau Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2017 20:01:10 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.9.16-gentoo; KDE/4.14.29; x86_64; ; ) References: <201704202028.53113.luke@dashjr.org> <06E90C6D-8B4C-40A7-8807-8811A27AE401@xbt.hk> In-Reply-To: <06E90C6D-8B4C-40A7-8807-8811A27AE401@xbt.hk> X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <201704262001.10933.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Segwit v2 X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2017 20:02:01 -0000 On Wednesday 26 April 2017 7:31:38 PM Johnson Lau wrote: > I prefer not to do anything that requires pools software upgrade or wallet > upgrade. So I prefer to keep the dummy marker, and not change the > commitment structure as suggested by another post. =46air enough, I guess. Although I think the dummy marker could actually be= non- consensus critical so long as the hashing replaces it with a 0. > For your second suggestion, I think we should keep scriptSig empty as that > should be obsoleted. If you want to put something in scriptSig, you should > put it in witness instead. There are things scriptSig can do that witness cannot today - specifically = add=20 additional conditions under the signature. We can always obsolete scriptSig= =20 later, after segwit has provided an alternative way to do this. > Maybe we could restrict witness to IsPushOnly() scriptPubKey, so miners > can=E2=80=99t put garbage to legacy txs. They already can malleate transactions and add garbage to the blocks. I don= 't=20 see the benefit here. Luke