Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 117 Feedback

2018-01-15 Thread Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
On Tuesday 16 January 2018 1:06:14 AM Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev wrote: > "Russell O'Connor" writes: > > However, if I understand correctly, the situation for BIP 117 is entirely > > different. As far as I understand there is currently no restrictions > > about terminating a v0 witness program

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 117 Feedback

2018-01-15 Thread Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 1:06 AM, Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev wrote: > The rule AFAICT is "standard transactions must still work". This was > violated with low-S, but the transformation was arguably trivial. That is my view, generally. Like any other principle, its applicability is modulated b

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 117 Feedback

2018-01-15 Thread Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev
"Russell O'Connor" writes: > However, if I understand correctly, the situation for BIP 117 is entirely > different. As far as I understand there is currently no restrictions about > terminating a v0 witness program with a non-empty alt-stack, and there are > no restrictions on leaving non-canonic

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposal to reduce mining power bill

2018-01-15 Thread nullius via bitcoin-dev
On 2018-01-15 at 22:47:54 +, Enrique Arizón Benito wrote: Hi all, just new to the list and curious to know if next proposal (or similar) for reducing mining-power consumption has already been discussed. The objective is to reduce the power consumption required while keeping the network

[bitcoin-dev] Proposal to reduce mining power bill

2018-01-15 Thread Enrique Arizón Benito via bitcoin-dev
Hi all, just new to the list and curious to know if next proposal (or similar) for reducing mining-power consumption has already been discussed. The objective is to reduce the power consumption required while keeping the network safe and the miners "motivated" and cooperative to continue mining:

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Update links (use ssl-variant) to opensource.org/[..x..]MIT ?

2018-01-15 Thread Felix Wolfsteller via bitcoin-dev
I am a bit disappointed about the feedback (just received one off-list ;) ), but understand now that this mailing list is protocol-only discussions. So - sorry for that. Anybody interested can follow progress here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12190 Thanks, Felix On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 a

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Ivy: a higher-level language targeting Bitcoin Script

2018-01-15 Thread Daniel Robinson via bitcoin-dev
Hi Matt, Thanks for raising this. Since the compiler only produces SegWit addresses, I hadn't worried at all about malleability, but as you pointed out out-of-band, malleability in the length of an argument can allow an attacker to deflate the feerate of a transaction. There was in fact a minor w