From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13E5AC000A for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:55:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF05E40395 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:55:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.107 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MhgUdQdVxEL4 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:55:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail.wpsoftware.net (unknown [66.183.0.205]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F17A640384 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:55:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from camus (camus-andrew.lan [192.168.0.190]) by mail.wpsoftware.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3C1C04018D; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:47:59 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:55:47 +0000 From: Andrew Poelstra To: Christopher Gilliard , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - limiting OP_RETURN / HF 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: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:55:53 -0000 On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 03:34:33PM +0000, Christopher Gilliard via bitcoin-dev wrote: > This sounds like a good justification to remove the legacy multi-signature > capabilities as well. > Doing so would confiscate coins, and also it is impossible to remove legacy multisignatures in general without gutting almost all of Script. > >> Thus, given that it is otherwise impossible to stop people from putting > arbitrary data values into their transactions, then we rather encourage > people who are going to encode their arbitrary data in transaction to use > the OP_RETURN outputs in order to avoid UTXO bloat. > > You can't make it completely impossible to do that, but you can make it > harder and at the same time you can provide a solution for doing what they > want to do. > I don't think you can even make it harder in a meaningful sense. There is too much flexibility in transaction data. -- Andrew Poelstra Director of Research, Blockstream Email: apoelstra at wpsoftware.net Web: https://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew The sun is always shining in space -Justin Lewis-Webster