From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE6D9C002B for ; Sat, 4 Feb 2023 23:15:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33650401CA for ; Sat, 4 Feb 2023 23:15:08 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 33650401CA X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dLIWbutpcYye for ; Sat, 4 Feb 2023 23:15:07 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org EE1084010E Received: from smtpout3.mo529.mail-out.ovh.net (smtpout3.mo529.mail-out.ovh.net [46.105.54.81]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE1084010E for ; Sat, 4 Feb 2023 23:15:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mxplan6.mail.ovh.net (unknown [10.108.16.173]) by mo529.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC32720BCA; Sat, 4 Feb 2023 23:09:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from peersm.com (37.59.142.97) by DAG6EX2.mxp6.local (172.16.2.52) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.17; Sun, 5 Feb 2023 00:09:10 +0100 Authentication-Results: garm.ovh; auth=pass (GARM-97G0024a8c0359-e5f7-4682-84b6-838bcdcd036f, 0098AF237195B9B300583606E28666A1C7481BE7) smtp.auth=aymeric@peersm.com X-OVh-ClientIp: 92.184.100.83 To: Christopher Allen References: <57f780b1-f262-9394-036c-70084320e9cf@peersm.com> <3d00aacb-585d-f875-784d-34352860d725@peersm.com> From: Aymeric Vitte Message-ID: <230265ee-c3f8-dff3-9192-f0c8dc4d913c@peersm.com> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 00:09:02 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Originating-IP: [37.59.142.97] X-ClientProxiedBy: DAG8EX1.mxp6.local (172.16.2.71) To DAG6EX2.mxp6.local (172.16.2.52) X-Ovh-Tracer-GUID: a47f6029-831a-4d01-921e-4d7209d84864 X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 16543410282279298013 X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: -100 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrudegfedgtdeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuqfggjfdpvefjgfevmfevgfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecuhedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhepuffvfhevhffkffgfgggjtgfgihesthhqredttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepteihmhgvrhhitgcugghithhtvgcuoegrhihmvghrihgtsehpvggvrhhsmhdrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepiefgleegvdfhjefgtdduueetudetkedukeeuudejudehieevhfdvtdevjeehudegnecukfhppeduvdejrddtrddtrddupdefjedrheelrddugedvrdeljeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepihhnvghtpeduvdejrddtrddtrddupdhmrghilhhfrhhomhepoegrhihmvghrihgtsehpvggvrhhsmhdrtghomheqpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopedupdhrtghpthhtohepkhhkrghrrghsrghvvhgrshesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdpsghithgtohhinhdquggvvheslhhishhtshdrlhhinhhugihfohhunhgurghtihhonhdrohhrghdpvehhrhhishhtohhphhgvrhetsehlihhfvgifihhthhgrlhgrtghrihhthidrtghomhdpoffvtefjohhsthepmhhohedvledpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhht X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 04 Feb 2023 23:16:58 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Debate: 64 bytes in OP_RETURN VS taproot OP_FALSE OP_IF OP_PUSH X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2023 23:15:09 -0000 I don't know, what number would you advise? When I made the bitcoin-transactions nodejs module some years ago the limit (from the specs) was 512B It's not a fork, super easy to do And necessary because bitcoin on ground of I don't know what rule allowing the IF/ENDIF "unlimited" storage just mimics ethereum for the worse, and is again quite dubious to use Le 04/02/2023 =C3=A0 23:18, Christopher Allen a =C3=A9crit : > 520 because that is a similar limit in taproot? Some multiple of > hash+signature+metadata to satisfy others (that still might not be > satisfied by any choice).