📅 Original date posted:2019-04-29
📝 Original message:On Saturday 27 April 2019 10:37:29 Aymeric Vitte via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Maybe trivial question but asking here because I can't find anything
> clear (or updated) about it: is somewhere explained in details what txs
> are considered standard and non standard today without having to read
> the core code?
>
> For example, modification of multisig 2 of 3:
>
> scriptSig:
> OP_0
> OP_PUSHDATA sign1
> OP_PUSHDATA sign2
> OP_2
> OP_PUSHDATA <pubkey1><pubkey2><pubkey3> OP_3 OP_CHECKMULTISIG
>
> scriptPubKey:
> OP_HASH160 hash160(<pubkey1><pubkey2><pubkey3> OP_3
> OP_CHECKMULTISIG) OP_EQUAL
>
> Is this standard? Are lightning txs standards ? etc
The name is confusing. It has little to do with standards, really.
IsStandard is just one of the functions which implement the node's policy.
It allows many things for which there is no standard (eg, data carrier /
OP_RETURN outputs), and can vary freely from node to node (either by
configurable parameters, or by different/modified software) without breaking
consensus.
As it is a node-specific criteria, it is not itself even a possible *subject*
for standards.
Additionally, it should not be given much (if any) attention when defining new
standards. Just do what makes sense for the standard, and node policies can
be adapted around that.
So, overall, there's limited use case for documenting this beyond the code.
It makes far more sense to document actual standards instead.
Luke
Luke Dashjr [ARCHIVE] /
npub1tf…rfq0n
2023-06-07 18:17:50
in reply to nevent1q…x6sv
Author Public Key
npub1tfk373zg9dnmtvxnpnq7s2dkdgj37rwfj3yrwld7830qltmv8qps8rfq0nPublished at
2023-06-07 18:17:50Event JSON
{
"id": "f8ad3648f54f7a8112e3abd6fae620b35449c5979c56db7ff2610b1056e36295",
"pubkey": "5a6d1f44482b67b5b0d30cc1e829b66a251f0dc99448377dbe3c5e0faf6c3803",
"created_at": 1686161870,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"0d900158f9d5b26bcb072426b2be38ab4201494265f56ca3fa9608d8abb0b82b",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"9aa1e5d69cc915a32326389b502027c20e869c1a270ef92a834f4064d51599d9",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"4505072744a9d3e490af9262bfe38e6ee5338a77177b565b6b37730b63a7b861"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2019-04-29\n📝 Original message:On Saturday 27 April 2019 10:37:29 Aymeric Vitte via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e Maybe trivial question but asking here because I can't find anything\n\u003e clear (or updated) about it: is somewhere explained in details what txs\n\u003e are considered standard and non standard today without having to read\n\u003e the core code?\n\u003e\n\u003e For example, modification of multisig 2 of 3:\n\u003e\n\u003e scriptSig:\n\u003e OP_0\n\u003e OP_PUSHDATA sign1\n\u003e OP_PUSHDATA sign2\n\u003e OP_2\n\u003e OP_PUSHDATA \u003cpubkey1\u003e\u003cpubkey2\u003e\u003cpubkey3\u003e OP_3 OP_CHECKMULTISIG\n\u003e \n\u003e scriptPubKey:\n\u003e OP_HASH160 hash160(\u003cpubkey1\u003e\u003cpubkey2\u003e\u003cpubkey3\u003e OP_3\n\u003e OP_CHECKMULTISIG) OP_EQUAL\n\u003e\n\u003e Is this standard? Are lightning txs standards ? etc\n\nThe name is confusing. It has little to do with standards, really.\nIsStandard is just one of the functions which implement the node's policy.\nIt allows many things for which there is no standard (eg, data carrier / \nOP_RETURN outputs), and can vary freely from node to node (either by \nconfigurable parameters, or by different/modified software) without breaking \nconsensus.\n\nAs it is a node-specific criteria, it is not itself even a possible *subject* \nfor standards.\n\nAdditionally, it should not be given much (if any) attention when defining new \nstandards. Just do what makes sense for the standard, and node policies can \nbe adapted around that.\n\nSo, overall, there's limited use case for documenting this beyond the code.\nIt makes far more sense to document actual standards instead.\n\nLuke",
"sig": "03197fb883eb377676f7844591f71dc95f8c67f17a37b4e8ad695fe85892380f17433f262d7d08291b9aeb9236873cff55778e04dc0b43f5e8b6d6467d6b26b7"
}