From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WGjd2-0004Vo-IZ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 06:30:32 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.215.51 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.51; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-la0-f51.google.com; Received: from mail-la0-f51.google.com ([209.85.215.51]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WGjd1-0002BP-OR for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 06:30:32 +0000 Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id c6so2013953lan.38 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 22:30:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.198.135 with SMTP id jc7mr3107684lbc.75.1392964225156; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 22:30:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.189.164 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 22:30:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <52FBD948.906@monetize.io> <201402122252.31060.luke@dashjr.org> <601EE159-9022-4ADF-80AC-7E1C39E86A65@mac.com> <81A62AB7-9EC6-439E-96CF-F064F0151BB9@mac.com> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 22:30:25 -0800 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: Mike Hearn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) 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 X-Headers-End: 1WGjd1-0002BP-OR Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [RFC] [BIP proposal] Dealing with malleability 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, 21 Feb 2014 06:30:32 -0000 On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:07 PM, Mike Hearn wrote: > No, I was thinking of the height in coinbase change. At any rate, p2sh was > supported by the consensus code in bitcoinj for a long time already, since > it was first written. > > Support for sending to such addresses in the wallet appeared once an app > that wanted that support also appeared, which seems OK - the market for > wallets is very competitive so there will always be some skew in what > features are worked on in what order. V3 transactions are a consensus change > that wallets will pick up at different times like any other feature. We're in agreement. I had mistakenly believed you were supporting the discussion about trying to force these constraints on current version transactions, in which case "wallets will pick up at different times" is an absolute deal breaker. :)