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 106E7F0F for ; Sun, 30 Aug 2015 02:20:20 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-lb0-f173.google.com (mail-lb0-f173.google.com [209.85.217.173]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DA09157 for ; Sun, 30 Aug 2015 02:20:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lbbtg9 with SMTP id tg9so46069987lbb.1 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 19:20:17 -0700 (PDT) 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=+OZyMXUgb6eeGeB/IjVB2YsBFAizCy76rF5UKeEYZ4A=; b=eA7VLpMUPd6DJ+hR4nB6PP2AT3eoORjajNiBtmZ7AyoU6Me7hg/gn9lyMjDN6P7BqY uSMUlOzBuAuC8djIfP+wImzqJTFoHr9+p2xRr8sDqllEYEIrMmi1thO4FKmSipg0QjUO UXSIdbufeZnb8E7DsWD2rc6to2CR2hs4b5JyM9rpqROvLF3GpREuQSSDqtLAJozL1WED Ukjm0f/32e42+H+g4/yy6tbzYFzaPQLP7c0drFxjUrZRYRuQNxo+czmwqXFKK6v89Pc8 c4CbKnaKTn0TCvS1PlUw9ryVTQJsFMVdC8XyEW0m2uJ3iGAloOUkSNtuH8sQhY1uBqtC peqA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkTsQCDHb9gN89wBo9OCkHbArxvC6k5vEqp4suzOVetWiku7RPga36TeU2jaS0d4IxvUK5h MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.21.196 with SMTP id x4mr7378787lae.117.1440901217422; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 19:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.25.15.22 with HTTP; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 19:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.25.15.22 with HTTP; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 19:20:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <2509151.XgrrNGsCxR@crushinator> Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2015 04:20:17 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= To: Chun Wang <1240902@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0158b6cc38a5ea051e7df535 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE, 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 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] RFC - BIP: URI scheme for Blockchain exploration X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2015 02:20:20 -0000 --089e0158b6cc38a5ea051e7df535 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Aug 29, 2015 7:02 PM, "Chun Wang via bitcoin-dev" < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 4:10 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n > wrote: > /tx/3b95a766d7a99b87188d6875c8484cb2b310b78459b7816d4dfc3f0f7e04281a?chain= =3D000000000933ea01ad0ee984209779baaec3ced90fa3f408719526f8d77f4943 > > > > (a tx in testnet) > > > > /block/00000000000000000b0d504d142ac8bdd1a2721d19f423a8146d0d6de882167b?cha= in=3D000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8ce26f > > Some altcoins (LTC and FTC for example) have the same genesis block hash. That's obviously a design mistake in FTC, but it's not unsolvable. FTC could move their genesis block to the next block (or the first one that is not identical to LTC's). Bitcoin and all its test chains have different genesis blocks, so I'm not sure FTC should be a concern for a BIP anyway... --089e0158b6cc38a5ea051e7df535 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Aug 29, 2015 7:02 PM, "Chun Wang via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfo= undation.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 4:10 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n
> <bitcoin-d= ev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> /tx/3b95a766d7a99b87188d6875c8484cb2b310b78459b7816d4dfc3f0f7e04281a?c= hain=3D000000000933ea01ad0ee984209779baaec3ced90fa3f408719526f8d77f4943
> >
> > (a tx in testnet)
> >
> > /block/00000000000000000b0d504d142ac8bdd1a2721d19f423a8146d0d6de8= 82167b?chain=3D000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8c= e26f
>
> Some altcoins (LTC and FTC for example) have the same genesis block ha= sh.

That's obviously a design mistake in FTC, but it's n= ot unsolvable. FTC could move their genesis block to the next block (or the= first one that is not identical to LTC's).

Bitcoin and all its test chains have different genesis block= s, so I'm not sure FTC should be a concern for a BIP anyway...

--089e0158b6cc38a5ea051e7df535--