From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1R9g0X-0007GU-P1 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:32:17 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.216.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.216.47; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-qw0-f47.google.com; Received: from mail-qw0-f47.google.com ([209.85.216.47]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1R9g0X-0006Qy-2d for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:32:17 +0000 Received: by qadc1 with SMTP id c1so582726qad.34 for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 09:32:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.186.69 with SMTP id cr5mr8448159qab.346.1317400331564; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 09:32:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.214.144 with HTTP; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 09:32:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 12:32:11 -0400 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: Mike Hearn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gmaxwell[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-Headers-End: 1R9g0X-0006Qy-2d Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Multisignature transations 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: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:32:17 -0000 On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Mike Hearn wrote: >> This adds initial support for three new types of transactions: >> (a and b) >> (a or b) >> (a and b) or c > > Does this mean dispute mediation (2-of-3) will not be supported? I thought > the plan was also to allow CHECKMULTISIG for smallish numbers of keys. The ease of omitting useful cases is why I was strongly supporting the full RPN boolean validation, even though it's harder to get good testing confidence.