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 1Z1H4e-0004Gc-SP for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 06 Jun 2015 16:35:56 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from mail-qc0-f175.google.com ([209.85.216.175]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Z1H4d-0000cR-Sp for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 06 Jun 2015 16:35:56 +0000 Received: by qcxw10 with SMTP id w10so39436012qcx.3 for ; Sat, 06 Jun 2015 09:35:50 -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=6jj48yoqlPjk7VW1iezPVNaGw9RfjRfdOSpPXETV7I8=; b=WINkJSNd4rqcjjT4NE1tg1QINc6hP6yph2Pzd5OkJzKy+ZrRlRUrpTaudL0S0X5E0W /g6XIJfFAUWucudL5AIpG89O/uTERtNDKK5Foda+nz0q6wcuYk78ehNHL4ns0Qa+gm5p HyBqipWIhHDBfl6ScLCEBiYQo3BlgwRQrcJ2WZBrMm7YR+B+hC7V1EwVzbn6Ut4qyTD+ lxC4iabLSNjaSDuabDwH21cASwv71p826JUgjIr+Gk01dKn8SKUc99Emz++E6N96rDF9 kNEEClWLocMUohdXcFsNzE6wV1HVtgzx5a6zH7JkXu8PI3dSgJ6v/AfbyqVkKY18kExx rkHw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm2wYKQ+fPcqQ+4/MXh0rP4i8qbziegv1kk7tQDBamjDJKl2oLz55EC2q2Ap3FzWeigLVW7 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.55.25.145 with SMTP id 17mr17286505qkz.46.1433608550447; Sat, 06 Jun 2015 09:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.96.145.9 with HTTP; Sat, 6 Jun 2015 09:35:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20150606153247.GA19619@savin.petertodd.org> References: <201506061518.19431.luke@dashjr.org> <20150606153247.GA19619@savin.petertodd.org> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2015 18:35:50 +0200 Message-ID: From: Kalle Rosenbaum To: Peter Todd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 0.3 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address X-Headers-End: 1Z1H4d-0000cR-Sp Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP for Proof of Payment 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: Sat, 06 Jun 2015 16:35:56 -0000 2015-06-06 17:32 GMT+02:00 Peter Todd : > On Sat, Jun 06, 2015 at 05:23:48PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Luke Dashjr wrote: >> >> > I also agree with Pieter, that this should *not* be so cleanly compatible >> > with Bitcoin transactions. If you wish to share code, perhaps using an >> > invalid opcode rather than OP_RETURN would be appropriate. >> >> >> Using an invalid opcode would merely send funds into the void. It wouldn't >> invalidate the transaction. > > Just set nLockTime to 500000000-1 and nSequence appropriately to make > the transaction impossible to mine for the next 9500 years. Actually, I suggested that on this list on april 27, but shortly after rejected my own idea: ####################### "Or a really high lock_time, but it would not make it invalid, just delayed." Ok, this was a bad idea, since nodes would have to keep it in memory. Please disregard that idea... ######################## Now I think I rejected it on based on a misunderstanding. Nodes will not put them in their mempool unless it's value is near in time, right? From the 0.9.0 release notes: "Accept nLockTime transactions that finalize in the next block". In that case this is a really nice option. > > Though I agree that this whole idea seems a bit dubious to me. > > -- > 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org > 00000000000000000000dd919214b66444dcebb4aa0214c1ab7c8b3b633be71f > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >