📅 Original date posted:2017-04-06
📝 Original message:On Wednesday, April 05, 2017 9:37:45 PM Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Beginning block X and until block Y the coinbase transaction of
> each block MUST either contain a BIP-141 segwit commitment or a
> correct WTXID commitment with ID 0xaa21a9ef.
Why not simply require the BIP-141 commitment?
> Existing segwit using miners are automatically compatible with
> this proposal.
Not entirely. The commitment is not required until segwit activates.
But this should be trivial to implement at least.
> == Overt attack ==
>
> The non-covert form can be trivially blocked by requiring that
> the header version match the coinbase transaction version.
>
> This proposal does not include this block because this method
> may become generally available without restriction in the future,
> does not generally interfere with improvements in the protocol,
> and because it is so easily detected that it could be blocked if
> it becomes an issue in the future.
How does it not interfere with BIP 9? I suppose the versionbits could be moved
to the generation transaction version, but this would hide them from light
clients.
> This document is placed in the public domain.
Could you please use one of these?
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0002.mediawiki#Recommended_licenses
Luke
Luke Dashjr [ARCHIVE] /
npub1tf…rfq0n
2023-06-07 17:59:23
in reply to nevent1q…hl64
Author Public Key
npub1tfk373zg9dnmtvxnpnq7s2dkdgj37rwfj3yrwld7830qltmv8qps8rfq0nPublished at
2023-06-07 17:59:23Event JSON
{
"id": "5f83ccf847f8a974106b520c0d5818cb8e394e0aa95bdd067bec4eaa73c3d4e3",
"pubkey": "5a6d1f44482b67b5b0d30cc1e829b66a251f0dc99448377dbe3c5e0faf6c3803",
"created_at": 1686160763,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ad36e2a7543163ffef3218fa3d55149ec67fbe14dd109a89d2940c12712bdc10",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"760039b395628b52a3e39f0720d60dd2644a97ab61dd0bd54db654101ed0ab5b",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"db760dade1185adc64d6fc9226d5fc4fa6c1e29ac791042a019c7e8c4917470c"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-04-06\n📝 Original message:On Wednesday, April 05, 2017 9:37:45 PM Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e Beginning block X and until block Y the coinbase transaction of\n\u003e each block MUST either contain a BIP-141 segwit commitment or a\n\u003e correct WTXID commitment with ID 0xaa21a9ef.\n\nWhy not simply require the BIP-141 commitment?\n\n\u003e Existing segwit using miners are automatically compatible with\n\u003e this proposal.\n\nNot entirely. The commitment is not required until segwit activates.\nBut this should be trivial to implement at least.\n\n\u003e == Overt attack ==\n\u003e \n\u003e The non-covert form can be trivially blocked by requiring that\n\u003e the header version match the coinbase transaction version.\n\u003e \n\u003e This proposal does not include this block because this method\n\u003e may become generally available without restriction in the future,\n\u003e does not generally interfere with improvements in the protocol,\n\u003e and because it is so easily detected that it could be blocked if\n\u003e it becomes an issue in the future.\n\nHow does it not interfere with BIP 9? I suppose the versionbits could be moved \nto the generation transaction version, but this would hide them from light \nclients.\n\n\u003e This document is placed in the public domain.\n\nCould you please use one of these?\n\n https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0002.mediawiki#Recommended_licenses\n\nLuke",
"sig": "1fcba87320c05978569a9869b0eb7a76ecb7a6760a35be056d5a39a51d81129fc934c3d7c09b3ee1b04bb36a735cf57b588cb436d3e0a72fea21a6da7041f5b8"
}