public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] deterministic transaction expiration
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 16:17:02 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALxbBHXh-Fktsr96PMXdohJdgcUKoNreJ-ZuApKOX3-qSkdk2w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJHLa0OtPA3DGQuJhp3zkK5dnBux6TFAw3qDsBdO0zaxrqBgRg@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2444 bytes --]

+1 for the new field, overloading fields with new meaning is definitely not
a good idea.

Something like nExpireAt with a block height sounds reasonable to me, but
we need to document that the usual caveats with blockchain reorgs apply.


On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com> wrote:

>  ...because nLockTime is the exact opposite of expiration.  A locked TX
> begins life invalid, and becomes valid (not-expired) after nLockTime passes.
>
> A new field containing expiration time would work.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> How is eventual expiration of a tx that started life with an nLockTime in
>> the future "breaking", any more than any other tx expiring?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 8/6/2014 6:54 AM, Mike Hearn wrote:
>>
>> We could however introduce a new field in a new tx version. We know we
>> need to rev the format at some point anyway.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  ...and existing users and uses of nLockTime suddenly become worthless,
>>> breaking payment channel refunds and other active uses of nLockTime.
>>>
>>> You cannot assume the user is around to rewrite their nLockTime, if it
>>> fails to be confirmed before some arbitrary deadline being set.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:01 AM, Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>
>>      If nLockTime is used for expiration, transaction creator can't lie
>>>> to
>>>> help tx live longer without pushing initial confirmation eligibility
>>>> into the future.  Very pretty.  It would also enable "fill or kill"
>>>> transactions with a backdated nLockTime, which must be confirmed in a
>>>> few blocks, or start vanishing from mempools.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Jeff Garzik
> Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
> BitPay, Inc.      https://bitpay.com/
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Infragistics Professional
> Build stunning WinForms apps today!
> Reboot your WinForms applications with our WinForms controls.
> Build a bridge from your legacy apps to the future.
>
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=153845071&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5705 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2014-08-06 15:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-08-01  0:58 [Bitcoin-development] deterministic transaction expiration Kaz Wesley
2014-08-01  1:06 ` Peter Todd
2014-08-01  1:37   ` Kaz Wesley
2014-08-01  1:38 ` Matt Whitlock
2014-08-01  2:28   ` Gregory Maxwell
2014-08-01  3:26     ` Matt Whitlock
2014-08-01  3:31       ` Gregory Maxwell
2014-08-05 18:01         ` Alex Mizrahi
2014-08-02  0:36 ` Tom Harding
2014-08-05 17:02   ` Flavien Charlon
2014-08-05 17:48 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-05 18:54   ` Mike Hearn
2014-08-05 19:08     ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-05 19:10   ` Kaz Wesley
2014-08-05 19:36     ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-06  4:01     ` Tom Harding
2014-08-06 12:55       ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-06 13:54         ` Mike Hearn
2014-08-06 14:44           ` Tom Harding
2014-08-06 15:08             ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-06 15:17               ` Christian Decker [this message]
2014-08-06 15:42                 ` Peter Todd
2014-08-06 16:15                   ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-06 17:02                     ` Tom Harding
2014-08-06 17:21                       ` Mark Friedenbach
2014-08-06 17:34                         ` Peter Todd
2014-08-06 17:24                       ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-06 16:31                   ` Mark Friedenbach
2014-08-06 17:20                     ` Peter Todd
2014-08-06 17:30                       ` Mark Friedenbach
2014-08-06 17:38                         ` Peter Todd
2014-08-08 17:38                 ` Tom Harding
2014-08-08 18:13                   ` Jeff Garzik
2014-08-08 18:42                     ` Kaz Wesley

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CALxbBHXh-Fktsr96PMXdohJdgcUKoNreJ-ZuApKOX3-qSkdk2w@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=decker.christian@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=jgarzik@bitpay.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox