On Sun, Jul 10, 2022 at 3:05 AM vjudeu via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > Not really, because people that run full nodes, just accepted Segwit > and Taproot. They had no choice. And in case of zero satoshis, it could > be the same: you would see zero if you look at raw bytes, but you will > see non-zero values, if you use some upgraded client, that will support > amount hiding, or other features. > > Segwit: old nodes see no new signatures, new nodes see all signatures > Zero satoshis: old nodes see new zero amounts, new nodes see all amounts > > It is that simple.
I see what you mean, have the P2P messages depend on whether the peer is running old code (doesn't know about tail emission) or new code (does know about it). I don't think this can work in this case. It worked for Segwit because the P2P differences involved only signatures (which determine whether the transaction is valid), not the *effect* of the transaction, that is, how it changes the UTXO set. Consensus requires all nodes to always agree on the UTXO set. Larry Ruane _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
