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 1108E3229 for ; Sat, 19 Jan 2019 01:42:53 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-40135.protonmail.ch (mail-40135.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.135]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C41E76D for ; Sat, 19 Jan 2019 01:42:52 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2019 01:42:47 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=default; t=1547862168; bh=jArRcApFV96u8OkuKfm902P0aA8a2Uef52QlBfKvV3Q=; h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Feedback-ID: From; b=QmjeV55xeU5Jl4Z0ajSqe5NtNZDxh8u0XiSSl/GXcg6q4ygHkFI0S6uKeMwZ12oqB ji5UV3fbEMkYZ74mQVZPg/fkEkTyA0wMxB4uf6021iVQwIzagdfArEwhZsnisAGmTN z2ng8P91q2UuToxDwHPMHIixUGGtAbfl9rGIhtsc= To: Matt Bell , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion From: ZmnSCPxj Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Feedback-ID: el4j0RWPRERue64lIQeq9Y2FP-mdB86tFqjmrJyEPR9VAtMovPEo9tvgA0CrTsSHJeeyPXqnoAu6DN-R04uJUg==:Ext:ProtonMail MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL, 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 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 19 Jan 2019 15:43:58 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proof-of-Stake Bitcoin Sidechains 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: Sat, 19 Jan 2019 01:42:53 -0000 Good morning Matt, It seems to me much more interesting if the stakes used to weigh voting pow= er are UTXOs on the Bitcoin blockchain. This idea is what I call "mainstake"; rather than a blockchain having its o= wn token that is self-attesting (which is insecure). It seems to me, naively, that the same script you propose here can be used = for mainstake. For instance, the sidechain network might accept potential stakers on the m= ainchain, if the staker proves the existence of a mainchain transaction who= se output is for example: OP_DROP "1 year" OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY OP_DROP OP_CHECKSIG The sidechain network could accept this and use the value of the output as = the weight of the vote of that stake. Regards, ZmnSCPxj Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 Original Me= ssage =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 On Saturday, January 19, 2019 6:59 AM, Matt Bell via bitcoin-dev wrote: > I have been working on a design for Bitcoin sidechains using the Tendermi= nt BFT consensus protocol, which is commonly used to build proof-of-stake n= etworks (Cosmos is the notable one). > > The design ends up being very similar to Blockstream's Liquid sidechain, = since Tendermint consensus is not far off from Liquid's "strong federation"= consensus. > > Any feedback about improvements or critical flaws would be greatly apprec= iated. The design document is here: https://github.com/mappum/bitcoin-peg/b= lob/master/bitcoinPeg.md (that repo also contains a simplified implementati= on of this sidechain design). > > Thanks for your feedback, > Matt Bell