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 C5E32B5A for ; Sun, 5 Jul 2015 19:56:59 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-pa0-f45.google.com (mail-pa0-f45.google.com [209.85.220.45]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78026168 for ; Sun, 5 Jul 2015 19:56:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pacws9 with SMTP id ws9so85021361pac.0 for ; Sun, 05 Jul 2015 12:56:59 -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:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=hwV7lVhgRj2U6R2JNzTHb++5JQU2McsFCZlpmvql7cY=; b=Yen0NGIcnrnD1yxmYMlUJAyeMbpEeGzxPeTcO+O5x8jItgxVB49LL/afMOe0cSV6ng bhSAr3Mhc8kDsB+CKiJsxivXfcWxc6qrhVftDpyDzdU858FppE0Cl79Kaj0phWnHcFqG FDg2k73cc9wc2vbJq6awdy/1ztuMVIlBzYoBp/nBC2w70MEJBeL5yHqpzgRRwvdUovhD B3zluNHVVNuonMbnEzCFfQDyfbHOp4ORXMh6aUf79uuMzRa4I8LHoFSrAXn40lXYYRVi HVAiox8cg9uHQjgPByxjRTexCBye2O7t3uDhE4jbtg4FM6P64uIvjAuBdDHU/39H30ug 6o5w== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn9BMCKCOB5IKh0VovHzbRX+r4OsA6QReaxTnmJvJXiqfCyOugAaKxDoP4zIS/oWuKrEPkt X-Received: by 10.70.1.102 with SMTP id 6mr97443298pdl.32.1436126219196; Sun, 05 Jul 2015 12:56:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.89] (99-8-65-117.lightspeed.davlca.sbcglobal.net. [99.8.65.117]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id v17sm15681060pbs.35.2015.07.05.12.56.56 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 05 Jul 2015 12:56:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <55998C0C.5050207@thinlink.com> Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2015 12:57:00 -0700 From: Tom Harding User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Friedenbach References: <55994696.1090705@thinlink.com> <55998AA3.4060801@thinlink.com> In-Reply-To: <55998AA3.4060801@thinlink.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010803070900020706070708" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW 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@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 68 (Relative Locktime) bug X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2015 19:56:59 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010803070900020706070708 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Never mind that last bit. I overlooked that the other inputs can independently make the tx non-final. On 7/5/2015 12:50 PM, Tom Harding wrote: > > It would also allow an explicit relative locktime of 0, which would > help applications avoid accidentally finalizing the whole transaction > when they only meant to not impose a relative locktime on one input. --------------010803070900020706070708 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Never mind that last bit.  I overlooked that the other inputs can independently make the tx non-final.

On 7/5/2015 12:50 PM, Tom Harding wrote:

It would also allow an explicit relative locktime of 0, which would help applications avoid accidentally finalizing the whole transaction when they only meant to not impose a relative locktime on one input.

--------------010803070900020706070708--