From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WWwPp-0003ZO-0N for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 06 Apr 2014 23:23:53 +0000 Received: from mail-pa0-f45.google.com ([209.85.220.45]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WWwPn-0002cu-G7 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 06 Apr 2014 23:23:52 +0000 Received: by mail-pa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id kl14so5885751pab.4 for ; Sun, 06 Apr 2014 16:23:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent :mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=8ku/IJNF/rRCEyhLCproxvchPbpj3ACWoo7EBWdCpHY=; b=Em1m0vHfUGjbkqSHiaqlr2LC5Efm2DnxSz20IDjOfjLQgE4SNOPc+IxgXCcSFdBql+ yrXmd5hyq1f8+qRpzDjHotHQ7H11KdLgm1NQ5YZN6CJWmNikWbzvCgs/fTLaSmS/goAw VuI78MpK5RP66ifUvlvtRf/ACqRHg3CVjt81BqSeg2k/pyZl9iZE87r7v/Jh+ys1JraN bI99ERbSqWT48y9qvyHF5+qgtFMfJJxX4mLDC0evWbDyxLhbTRWIAr7iI1aaKUrFgrhh +IgnNyzNMxpkd3F7W2DhB0cDukOL/HtKVoOXkhROYLT+Ou3EXVnLmXo94Oaq+WFJMsWa G2pw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlyaqr0gDhUY4EXzTxEWBJ+VpcxKsW63g6OEUm0U24WNN7zRNtBVEAokytNdnQmgVrsXzF8 X-Received: by 10.68.134.198 with SMTP id pm6mr27927826pbb.9.1396826625569; Sun, 06 Apr 2014 16:23:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.127.189] (50-0-36-93.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net. [50.0.36.93]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id tf10sm32480313pbc.70.2014.04.06.16.23.44 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 06 Apr 2014 16:23:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5341E1FF.7080204@monetize.io> Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2014 16:23:43 -0700 From: Mark Friedenbach Organization: Monetize.io Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. X-Headers-End: 1WWwPn-0002cu-G7 Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Feedback request: colored coins protocol X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2014 23:23:53 -0000 On 04/06/2014 01:59 PM, Flavien Charlon wrote: > Do you think this is the right approach? No, I'm afraid it has significant flaws. The two chief flaws are (1) there is absolutely no reason to include asset tagging information if it is not validated - that just bloats the block chain, and (2) you shouldn't be using fixed increments for share sizes either. It's not future-proof as the minimum output size changes based on the minimum fee (currently 540 satoshis, not 5,400, and it will float in the near future). And needing a capital of 54 btc for a million shares is totally unacceptable. Flavien, I know that I've seen you on the Bitcoin-X mailing list, where these issues have been mostly worked out: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/bitcoinx Have you seen the padded order-based coloring scheme worked out here? https://github.com/bitcoinx/colored-coin-tools/wiki/colored_coins_intro Kind regards, Mark Friedenbach