public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [softfork proposal] Strict DER signatures
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 14:48:10 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgQjTq1M6fF5KDiZ-qBrCWjs9z5VKtj-c1ghRfDeK6iyPA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPg+sBjQAi_hCcoV0gecVQAd4PYKzRd5F_nymz8UVt9BFg8O2Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com> wrote:
> * Add it to the softfork now, and be done with it.

Initially I was of the opinion that we couldn't do that, because
soft-forks which hit transactions many nodes would relay+mine creates
a forking risk... but with the realization that imbalanced R/S plus
checksig-not would only be work with 0.10rc/git changed my mind.
Unlike two years ago miners no longer appear to be racing the bleeding
edge, and it's never show up in a release. Obviously the next RC would
also make those non-standard. And then we'll have some non-trivial
amount of time before the soft-fork activates for whatever stragglers
there are on 0.10 prerelease code to update. The deployment of the
soft-fork rules themselves will already drive people to update.

In terms of being robust to implementation differences, not permitting
overlarge R/S is obviously prudent.

So I think we should just go ahead with R/S length upper bounds as
both IsStandard and in STRICTDER.



  reply	other threads:[~2015-01-25 14:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-21  0:35 [Bitcoin-development] [softfork proposal] Strict DER signatures Pieter Wuille
2015-01-21  4:45 ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-21 16:49   ` Pieter Wuille
2015-01-21 19:10 ` Peter Todd
2015-01-21 19:29 ` Douglas Roark
2015-01-21 20:30   ` Pieter Wuille
2015-01-21 20:39     ` Douglas Roark
2015-01-21 20:37   ` Gavin Andresen
2015-01-21 20:52     ` Douglas Roark
2015-01-21 21:22     ` Pieter Wuille
2015-01-21 20:27 ` Andrew Poelstra
2015-01-21 22:57 ` Dave Collins
2015-01-22  0:32 ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-22  3:12   ` David Vorick
2015-01-22  4:18   ` Matt Whitlock
2015-01-22  4:20     ` Pieter Wuille
2015-01-25 14:34   ` Pieter Wuille
2015-01-25 14:48     ` Gregory Maxwell [this message]
2015-02-03  0:44       ` Pieter Wuille
2015-02-03  2:21         ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-02-03 12:00         ` Wladimir
2015-02-03 14:30           ` Alex Morcos
2015-02-03 18:15           ` Pieter Wuille
2015-02-03 18:19             ` Gavin Andresen
2015-02-03 19:22               ` Jeff Garzik
2015-02-03 23:38             ` Pieter Wuille
2015-01-22 22:41 ` Zooko Wilcox-OHearn
2015-01-25 16:57   ` Pieter Wuille
2015-01-26  5:14 ` Pieter Wuille
2015-01-26 18:35   ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-01-28  6:24     ` Wladimir
2015-02-06 21:38     ` Pieter Wuille

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAAS2fgQjTq1M6fF5KDiZ-qBrCWjs9z5VKtj-c1ghRfDeK6iyPA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=gmaxwell@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=pieter.wuille@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox