From: yanmaani@cock.li
To: Christopher Gilliard <christopher.gilliard@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - limiting OP_RETURN / HF
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 01:22:51 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bfea86cbe0d63df5219b77ca2409cea1@cock.li> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK=nyAxOa8fsVfxucH7WTTMn25BCzgQ28h_sNsunedpCoRXjjQ@mail.gmail.com>
This has already been discussed and proposed in various papers and
articles, typically to replace SHA-256d with something else. It
basically works, but there's a some tiny issues:
1) Who goes first?
If you first calculate the expensive PoW and then do a cheap SHA-256d
around it, anyone can malleate it by changing the outer PoW.
If you first calculate the cheap SHA-256d and then do an expensive PoW
around it, it would work, but then you would have to retool the P2P
protocol.
2) What's the incentive for miners?
In a "normal" soft-fork, miners have the incentive to upgrade because
their blocks will be orphaned if they don't, and even the old clients
won't accept them.
Here, miners will be able to produce an alternate chain that will appear
valid to old clients, and that the new miners won't be able to orphan
(since their hash power is much weaker).
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-20 1:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-16 7:45 [bitcoin-dev] BIP - limiting OP_RETURN / HF Christopher Gilliard
2021-04-16 13:56 ` Russell O'Connor
2021-04-16 15:34 ` Christopher Gilliard
2021-04-16 15:55 ` Andrew Poelstra
2021-04-16 23:52 ` ZmnSCPxj
2021-04-17 3:57 ` Christopher Gilliard
2021-04-17 15:50 ` Peter Todd
2021-04-17 16:57 ` Christopher Gilliard
2021-04-16 13:59 ` Clark Moody
2021-04-16 15:33 ` Christopher Gilliard
2021-04-16 16:32 ` Jeremy
2021-04-16 17:05 ` Christopher Gilliard
2021-04-16 18:00 ` Jeremy
2021-04-16 19:15 ` Kostas Karasavvas
2021-04-16 20:12 ` Christopher Gilliard
2021-04-17 7:41 ` Kostas Karasavvas
2021-04-16 20:30 ` Ruben Somsen
2021-04-16 21:09 ` Christopher Gilliard
2021-04-20 1:23 ` yanmaani
2021-04-20 8:45 ` Zach Greenwood
2021-04-20 17:12 ` Christopher Gilliard
2021-04-20 19:07 ` Ruben Somsen
2021-05-03 5:17 ` ZmnSCPxj
2021-05-04 12:51 ` Ruben Somsen
2021-04-20 1:22 ` yanmaani [this message]
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=bfea86cbe0d63df5219b77ca2409cea1@cock.li \
--to=yanmaani@cock.li \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=christopher.gilliard@gmail.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