From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YxfIn-0003DP-VK for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 27 May 2015 17:39:37 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 74.125.82.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.47; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-wg0-f47.google.com; Received: from mail-wg0-f47.google.com ([74.125.82.47]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YxfIl-0005QE-Qz for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 27 May 2015 17:39:37 +0000 Received: by wgv5 with SMTP id 5so16052804wgv.1 for ; Wed, 27 May 2015 10:39:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.12.228 with SMTP id b4mr51818483wic.92.1432748369808; Wed, 27 May 2015 10:39:29 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.194.143.9 with HTTP; Wed, 27 May 2015 10:39:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 19:39:29 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ehtyt9bEu-ael5Htp5mMM1Tm0Yw Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Mark Friedenbach Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2a3a8a295a0051713b977 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) 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 (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 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: 1YxfIl-0005QE-Qz Cc: Bitcoin Development Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Consensus-enforced transaction replacement via sequence numbers 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: Wed, 27 May 2015 17:39:38 -0000 --001a11c2a3a8a295a0051713b977 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Mike, this proposal was purposefully constructed to maintain as well as > possible the semantics of Satoshi's original construction. Higher sequence > numbers -- chronologically later transactions -- are able to hit the chain > earlier, and therefore it can be reasonably argued will be selected by > miners before the later transactions mature. Did I fail in some way to > capture that original intent? > Right, but the original protocol allowed for e.g. millions of revisions of the transaction, hence for high frequency trading (that's actually how Satoshi originally explained it to me - as a way to do HFT - back then the channel concept didn't exist). As you point out, with a careful construction of channels you should only need to bump the sequence number when the channel reverses direction. If your app only needs to do that rarely, it's a fine approach.And your proposal does sounds better than sequence numbers being useless like at the moment. I'm just wondering if we can get back to the original somehow or at least leave a path open to it, as it seems to be a superset of all other proposals, features-wise. --001a11c2a3a8a295a0051713b977 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mike= , this proposal was purposefully constructed to maintain as well as possibl= e the semantics of Satoshi's original construction. Higher sequence num= bers -- chronologically later transactions -- are able to hit the chain ear= lier, and therefore it can be reasonably argued will be selected by miners = before the later transactions mature. Did I fail in some way to capture tha= t original intent?

Right, but the orig= inal protocol allowed for e.g. millions of revisions of the transaction, he= nce for high frequency trading (that's actually how Satoshi originally = explained it to me - as a way to do HFT - back then the channel concept did= n't exist).

As you point out, with a careful construction of channels you sho= uld only need to bump the sequence number when the channel reverses directi= on. If your app only needs to do that rarely, it's a fine approach.And = your proposal does sounds better than sequence numbers being useless like a= t the moment. I'm just wondering if we can get back to the original som= ehow or at least leave a path open to it, as it seems to be a superset of a= ll other proposals, features-wise.
--001a11c2a3a8a295a0051713b977--