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-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <jtimon@jtimon.cc>) id 1Xq4or-0008HI-Nb
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sun, 16 Nov 2014 18:45:05 +0000
Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com ([209.85.212.172])
	by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1Xq4oq-0003V3-Ad
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sun, 16 Nov 2014 18:45:05 +0000
Received: by mail-wi0-f172.google.com with SMTP id hi2so2198500wib.17
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Sun, 16 Nov 2014 10:44:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
	h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
	:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
	bh=JuqgHhrPOtPlmVgmCetofWvTLylRZ9hZ8O9VMmJZalA=;
	b=I2a2QQEgRxwqFw+JhqCT6Ga+FPozQ0j/J5VtybyKH35enpbcIvi/XzyOS2W/pcPb4g
	zUPZMv/3Qx+DCdCFKRrTy3l1RC9L6vrdCJ85jdyS+hj5rBldJti98jdIj6R8cIRL82Ww
	pQHhI+VFuwu/ehLRLaWvD+N+6B9r1sAl5nRIIsOZK9xLNtVt0TQn1xDqPFeg8Mu/JpBx
	d5kQ6BlEtv0LUlDluCrrrQDXshgEEkB2VXzMk2OyBt3HUWjDk7deiNDdIUtiHznyzCw4
	Qdu8RJxnbz7gE2BRea46TFP6crMg/y/jarIGX+Urz2gfP7gU3i//8gCKljmkhgAYqwSY
	mlBg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmexA4Jh/DHYGix8UBHN5yEhS6F7yK1KPdYp35ILDktr1aVz65J1OtUiOxqkgdcMDsIPdFO
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.150.138 with SMTP id ui10mr25226156wib.32.1416163498195; 
	Sun, 16 Nov 2014 10:44:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.19.38 with HTTP; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 10:44:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Originating-IP: [92.251.101.114]
In-Reply-To: <201411161724.19573.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <CABbpET9eTgk1GyxYbcG++O_rqsnfB7w5_Xp4XgE6qwkmGsm1eg@mail.gmail.com>
	<201411161724.19573.luke@dashjr.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 19:44:58 +0100
Message-ID: <CABm2gDpBOtZB01Qj3Dc3dWSpG2zLr+VPYbnwrq8YVh8qfxMW5Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
X-Headers-End: 1Xq4oq-0003V3-Ad
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	Flavien Charlon <flavien.charlon@coinprism.com>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Increasing the OP_RETURN maximum payload
	size
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 18:45:05 -0000

I agree with Luke, we can endlessly discuss the "best defaults" like
the default size allowed for OP_RETURN, minimum fees, anti-dust
policies, first-seen vs replace-by-fee, etc; but the fact is that
policies depend on miners. Unfortunately most miners and pools are
quite apathetic when it comes to configure their own policy.
In my opinion the best we can do is to make it easier for miners to
implement their own policies by abstracting out those parts of the
code. Pull requests like #5071 and #5114 are steps in that direction.
So if you're interested in having more miners accepting 80 bytes
OP_RETURN transactions, I suggest you invest some time reviewing and
testing those PRs.
Although this wasn't its main purpose, separating script/standard was
also a little step in the same direction.