public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [bitcoin-dev] Minutia in CT for Bitcoin. Was: SF proposal: prohibit unspendable outputs with amount=0
@ 2017-09-13  9:39 Gregory Maxwell
  2017-09-13 10:03 ` Peter Todd
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Gregory Maxwell @ 2017-09-13  9:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Peter Todd, Bitcoin Protocol Discussion

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 2) Spending CT-shielded outputs to unshielded outputs
>
> Here one or more CT-shielded outputs will be spent. Since their value is zero,
> we make up the difference by spending one or more outputs from the CT pool,
> with the change - if any - assigned to a CT-pool output.

Can we solve the problem that pool inputs are gratuitously non-reorg
safe, without creating something like a maturity limit for shielded to
unshielded?

So far the best I have is this:  Support unshielded coins in shielded
space too. So the only time you transition out of the pool is paying
to a legacy wallet.  If support were phased in (e.g. addresses that
say you can pay me in the pool after its enabled), and the pool only
used long after wallets supported getting payments in it, then this
would be pretty rare and a maturity limit wouldn't be a big deal.

Can better be done?


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2017-09-13 10:03 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-09-13  9:39 [bitcoin-dev] Minutia in CT for Bitcoin. Was: SF proposal: prohibit unspendable outputs with amount=0 Gregory Maxwell
2017-09-13 10:03 ` Peter Todd

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox