📅 Original date posted:2015-01-25
📝 Original message:On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille at gmail.com> wrote:
> * Add it to the softfork now, and be done with it.
Initially I was of the opinion that we couldn't do that, because
soft-forks which hit transactions many nodes would relay+mine creates
a forking risk... but with the realization that imbalanced R/S plus
checksig-not would only be work with 0.10rc/git changed my mind.
Unlike two years ago miners no longer appear to be racing the bleeding
edge, and it's never show up in a release. Obviously the next RC would
also make those non-standard. And then we'll have some non-trivial
amount of time before the soft-fork activates for whatever stragglers
there are on 0.10 prerelease code to update. The deployment of the
soft-fork rules themselves will already drive people to update.
In terms of being robust to implementation differences, not permitting
overlarge R/S is obviously prudent.
So I think we should just go ahead with R/S length upper bounds as
both IsStandard and in STRICTDER.
Gregory Maxwell [ARCHIVE] /
npub1f2…crwet
2023-06-07 15:28:57
in reply to nevent1q…396l
Author Public Key
npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwetPublished at
2023-06-07 15:28:57Event JSON
{
"id": "df194c666af3514e79ab8cc59090fbbc2804883f4c257928f37418d246c526b4",
"pubkey": "4aa6cf9aa5c8e98f401dac603c6a10207509b6a07317676e9d6615f3d7103d73",
"created_at": 1686151737,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"43498997aaf69cc28c108f60f2a0a9a1eeab544cf4e7f9ece35a133ac15cb4c1",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"ab5aa80ee574cd2e8169a9819467ca61293daccae58c3c7054c48d73afcc36b7",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5cb21bf5d7f25a9d46879713cbd32433bbc10e40ef813a3c28fe7355f49854d6"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-01-25\n📝 Original message:On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Pieter Wuille \u003cpieter.wuille at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e * Add it to the softfork now, and be done with it.\n\nInitially I was of the opinion that we couldn't do that, because\nsoft-forks which hit transactions many nodes would relay+mine creates\na forking risk... but with the realization that imbalanced R/S plus\nchecksig-not would only be work with 0.10rc/git changed my mind.\nUnlike two years ago miners no longer appear to be racing the bleeding\nedge, and it's never show up in a release. Obviously the next RC would\nalso make those non-standard. And then we'll have some non-trivial\namount of time before the soft-fork activates for whatever stragglers\nthere are on 0.10 prerelease code to update. The deployment of the\nsoft-fork rules themselves will already drive people to update.\n\nIn terms of being robust to implementation differences, not permitting\noverlarge R/S is obviously prudent.\n\nSo I think we should just go ahead with R/S length upper bounds as\nboth IsStandard and in STRICTDER.",
"sig": "104aeafe9bf7ca09c7ec656246e4d735a6d3aa9963a180f80e04aa3d4bb8f66458dcd9ea2253362964efd11ff5f092314938f95f672ff7f69e42d95648c4b09a"
}