From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BA1FC002B for ; Sat, 4 Feb 2023 22:18:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20AB14091B for ; Sat, 4 Feb 2023 22:18:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 20AB14091B Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lifewithalacrity-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.i=@lifewithalacrity-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=PCinWrmN X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.399 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iE57wjnD1XSI for ; Sat, 4 Feb 2023 22:18:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org A098640914 Received: from mail-lf1-x133.google.com (mail-lf1-x133.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::133]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A098640914 for ; Sat, 4 Feb 2023 22:18:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf1-x133.google.com with SMTP id bp15so12691038lfb.13 for ; Sat, 04 Feb 2023 14:18:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lifewithalacrity-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=qOtfEaQJftD/Ip/45Dja/C4o4w001i15RvxZkYNrboY=; b=PCinWrmNtepOkiZsHg+BlJZrbZHGiAe5eh0OHgLnDJdqDUaw5OJ6CJd/DTv2Zmu8ey vhOwWtOGvcFyBYUrdkUCrQ/wP3q1IQJHqcvB5Zk+myAH5DAHpxy226L3wdI059Ze87a+ d0insEEYXQf7ZzGHJ99JmqBV9+Zw0/dVSgo2fi/eMMAUkhVANJXiC5dL9HMuCxXhxJ84 WQ5xnXk7llpwY2xJd7Ecjn9AOwCYwbqRaK7eH6mQjUJmmZao7GPAWYzAwRgxx/7TVSOl 2pUmauvtjcWSHa3YLD5TM6LMBbx4IDL7q39taW098gwazet6TFoh+cCc16GMTXG1gq4j GNag== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=qOtfEaQJftD/Ip/45Dja/C4o4w001i15RvxZkYNrboY=; b=Q2bH7cSj933Y1ZmgNiYp9XaV4bdtbLmAlc8OH7hjQBu+bPIVJBdR7PIxlCDytAtQin jhyLRVwlptjdBZ8kQEicgxEK1/g3hvegeV1uS18KZe4BJ/+od62F/8SFb05d7Azh1LVu VN+ZZw2LuCXJ5nwDKBF+RfvOM2m836pb3Uts9uWkkIi92+fZRvufGhccGuuxX255O+Vj LXdxcqpzerNBjgexvGZdt+1oszlgVX5kTbz+zWT06t5knZvzI1vDJnxdABcUb/zmccse 4+asIWW5Rvgh+zvR/4ZU411F+vrVsIqtJ5W1vgAhm/LEdA9XvIwmLQvdheWD5deqNdbd aZdw== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXebz4k878coKt9eJ8XWeLhs6ux77xuYSBTkAAlL1uIlJ8PlSxW u6y/hc9SIEtF5nkNSpYTse+cREKdFso9dXJaP/A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set/ZihjJ2+r485A87rWuKzZ4HUicO89VXwj4hjWQwzvv3TPNwBaC8kv+XrHsxpZRKqpBXp6/KNWWsNrHI9mV6QY= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5490:0:b0:4d7:856:d4b6 with SMTP id t16-20020ac25490000000b004d70856d4b6mr2509863lfk.210.1675549123184; Sat, 04 Feb 2023 14:18:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <57f780b1-f262-9394-036c-70084320e9cf@peersm.com> <3d00aacb-585d-f875-784d-34352860d725@peersm.com> In-Reply-To: From: Christopher Allen Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2023 14:18:06 -0800 Message-ID: To: Aymeric Vitte Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004a8bcd05f3e72e64" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 04 Feb 2023 22:19:32 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Debate: 64 bytes in OP_RETURN VS taproot OP_FALSE OP_IF OP_PUSH X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2023 22:18:47 -0000 --0000000000004a8bcd05f3e72e64 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 12:55 PM Aymeric Vitte wrote: > Thanks Christopher, then I understand the process: > > - I must issue a PR where I switch 80 to another number, even if I am not > a C/C++ expert it looks easy > Yes, this would be an easy PR, at least to start. I suspect that longer-term, you'd need to draft some assistance to make it turn on/off from when the bitcoin daemon is initialized. But that could wait until the conversation has progressed some. The harder part will be writing the initial comment, where you should carefully explain the rationale, link to some existing conversations, try to point out in advance the obvious objections and rationale despite them, and explain your particular choice of number =E2=80=94 520 because that is = a similar limit in taproot? Some multiple of hash+signature+metadata to satisfy others (that still might not be satisfied by any choice). > - I must stay calm and answer all outstanding concerns about this trivia= l > change > > - Since I am not as clever as the bitcoin devs I must be ready to revise > my PR at any time > > - This could lead for the change to be from 80B to 82.xB where x comes > from a non understandable crypto formula > > - I must evangelize the change worldwide > > - Once accepted, I must collude (pay) with the nodes/miners so they updat= e > at a subtile block height decided by the community > That is true for forks, but I don't think this is a fork. It might require resolving some mempool issues (for instance for mining pools). But for it to become non-optional, you'll need to demonstrate that miners and full nodes have turned it on. Thus that is more a conversation than "collusion (pay)". > And then I must pray that the PR does not survive myself > > Looks like a pretty straight forward process. > I've seen worse. I co-authored TLS 1.0 (6 years) and DID 1.0 (5 years). > I am on this list since quite some time, so, seriously, this change is > needed, or, as I said before, deviant behaviours will happen, because the > "witness trick" or others do not work at all, and are clearly similar to > ethereum messy stuff > You have at least Concept ACK from me! ;-) -- Christopher Allen --0000000000004a8bcd05f3e72e64 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 12:55 PM Aymer= ic Vitte <aymeric@peersm.com&g= t; wrote:
=20 =20 =20

Thanks Christopher, then I understand the process:

- I must issue a PR where I switch 80 to another number, even if I am not a C/C++ expert it looks easy

Yes,= this would be an easy PR,=C2=A0at least to start. I suspect that longer-te= rm, you'd need to draft some assistance to make it turn on/off from whe= n the bitcoin daemon is initialized. But that could wait until the conversa= tion has progressed some.

The harder part will= be writing the initial comment, where you should carefully explain the rat= ionale, link to some existing conversations, try to point out in advance th= e obvious objections and rationale despite them, and explain your particula= r choice of number =E2=80=94 520 because that is a similar limit in taproot= ? Some multiple of hash+signature+metadata to satisfy others (that still mi= ght not be satisfied by any choice).

- I=C2=A0 must stay calm and answer all outstanding concerns about this trivial change

- Since I am not as clever as the bitcoin devs I must be ready to revise my PR at any time

- This could lead for the change to be from 80B to 82.xB where x comes from a non understandable crypto formula

- I must evangelize the change worldwide

- Once accepted, I must collude (pay) with the nodes/miners so they update at a subtile block height decided by the community

That is true for forks, but I don't think this= is a fork. It might require resolving some mempool issues (for instance fo= r mining pools). But for it to become non-optional, you'll need to demo= nstrate that miners and full nodes have turned it on. Thus that is more a c= onversation than "collusion (pay)".

And then I must pray that the PR does not survive myself

Looks like a pretty straight forward process.

I've seen worse. I co-authored TLS 1.0 (6 years) and DID 1.0 (= 5 years).

I am on this list since quite some time, so, seriously, this change is needed, or, as I said before, deviant behaviours will happen, because the "witness trick" or others do not work a= t all, and are clearly similar to ethereum messy stuff

You have at least Concept ACK from me! ;-)

-= - Christopher Allen=C2=A0
--0000000000004a8bcd05f3e72e64--