📅 Original date posted:2023-06-03
🗒️ Summary of this message: Bitcoin PoW Anchoring protocol reset allows for a special bitcoin transaction providing publically-identifiable OP_RETURN information about a new miner single-use-seal.
📝 Original message:Hi John,
Thank you for the question. We have discussed this case in the paper, second paragraph of the “Bitcoin PoW Anchoring” Section:
> If a party spends current miner single-use-seal without creating a commitment - or committing to a header without sufficient PoW, such closing is considered invalid; in this case, any party is allowed to create a special bitcoin transaction providing publically-identifiableOP_RETURNinformation ("announcement") about a new miner single-use-seal (protocol reset); only the firstOP_RETURNannouncement which is closed with a proper procedure is considered valid under the consensus rules.
Kind regards,
Maxim Orlovsky
On Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 4:30 PM, John Tromp via bitcoin-dev <[bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org](mailto:On Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 4:30 PM, John Tromp via bitcoin-dev <<a href=)> wrote:
>> The white paper describing the proposal can be found here:
>> https://github.com/LNP-BP/layer1/
>
> Some questions about the Bitcoin PoW anchoring:
>
> What if a miner spends the current miner single-use-seal while
> creating a commitment, but makes the PMT only partially available, or
> entirely unavailable ?
>
> How do other miners reach consensus on whether a protocol reset is
> required? It seems impossible to agree on something like PMT
> availability (much like mempool contents).
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20230603/283cc020/attachment.html>;
Dr Maxim Orlovsky [ARCHIVE] /
npub1a8…rpwgy
2023-06-07 23:22:05
in reply to nevent1q…2dv3
Author Public Key
npub1a80jcetgws9xmu7wnylvekpymw2acym2psjpp03e0chmhq38pc8qwrpwgyPublished at
2023-06-07 23:22:05Event JSON
{
"id": "769b6c6cdaca7629e9bb1b23dcbe91b80d25dee63ab46bde99efbe980f93196a",
"pubkey": "e9df2c6568740a6df3ce993eccd824db95dc136a0c2410be397e2fbb82270e0e",
"created_at": 1686180125,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"b4da4918021bdd3e34e112d3532abfcc1071d4d6b17079fb09fa75f137b29816",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"fe33e2c8ce90c9d766f967c04ccc510bf6936d10b669848646a9e4f9b69b1023",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"90987bf5bbd810b5e334015b3d1655dc3021b9ae394eb8a72b7117aaa3308561"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2023-06-03\n🗒️ Summary of this message: Bitcoin PoW Anchoring protocol reset allows for a special bitcoin transaction providing publically-identifiable OP_RETURN information about a new miner single-use-seal.\n📝 Original message:Hi John,\n\nThank you for the question. We have discussed this case in the paper, second paragraph of the “Bitcoin PoW Anchoring” Section:\n\n\u003e If a party spends current miner single-use-seal without creating a commitment - or committing to a header without sufficient PoW, such closing is considered invalid; in this case, any party is allowed to create a special bitcoin transaction providing publically-identifiableOP_RETURNinformation (\"announcement\") about a new miner single-use-seal (protocol reset); only the firstOP_RETURNannouncement which is closed with a proper procedure is considered valid under the consensus rules.\n\nKind regards,\nMaxim Orlovsky\n\nOn Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 4:30 PM, John Tromp via bitcoin-dev \u003c[bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org](mailto:On Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 4:30 PM, John Tromp via bitcoin-dev \u003c\u003ca href=)\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e\u003e The white paper describing the proposal can be found here:\n\u003e\u003e https://github.com/LNP-BP/layer1/\n\u003e\n\u003e Some questions about the Bitcoin PoW anchoring:\n\u003e\n\u003e What if a miner spends the current miner single-use-seal while\n\u003e creating a commitment, but makes the PMT only partially available, or\n\u003e entirely unavailable ?\n\u003e\n\u003e How do other miners reach consensus on whether a protocol reset is\n\u003e required? It seems impossible to agree on something like PMT\n\u003e availability (much like mempool contents).\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20230603/283cc020/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "a23323ea38a2038df3695c33aded9b2b6faa440e27dc39cf9095ebc016b7f0d4d174b3e4da943718e1f2b28b02b52a92b484eb38ff0cea4ca1688779f56f3f71"
}