š
Original date posted:2015-11-02
š Original message:On 11/01/2015 07:30 PM, Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> If at least one year's notice was given, then people aren't going to
> lose their money, since they have notice.
So after realizing that I misread substantial portions of this thread
due to a lack of attention to detail I'd like to point out this:
Bitcoin nodes have the capability to validate blocks going back to the
genesis block, including blocks which would not be valid if mined today
under current rules.
Therefore it must be the case that all the old consensus rules are
preserved somewhere in the current code bases of the various
implementations.
Given that, there shouldn't be any technical barrier to validating input
scripts according to the consensus rules that were in effect at the time
the input being spent was added to the blockchain.
Maybe dealing with output is more difficult.
Had every consensus rule change (deliberate and accidental) been
accompanied by a version number bump, it would have been possible to
phase out old versions without invaliding signed-but-unbroadcast
transactions by saying "as of block height x, transactions with version
y or lower are invalid unless their inputs are exclusively sourced from
blocks with heights < x"
If there already have been rule changes which have retroactively
invalided unbroadcast transactions which were valid at the time they
were signed, those rules could be relaxed to not apply to transactions
which exclusively spend inputs that existed before the rule change.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0xEAD9E623.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 23337 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151102/30e16f8d/attachment-0001.bin>;
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151102/30e16f8d/attachment-0001.sig>;
Justus Ranvier [ARCHIVE] /
npub1k2ā¦9qd6m
2023-06-07 17:44:02
in reply to nevent1qā¦q04m
Author Public Key
npub1k2eekmevs6gg60df75qpjw4a2atmy89vx28c8zqq5jxy64tuzrws39qd6mPublished at
2023-06-07 17:44:02Event JSON
{
"id": "d71208ffb986bec90f228dac64d70c54ae9da45a4ac5e453417239f03e46850b",
"pubkey": "b2b39b6f2c86908d3da9f500193abd5757b21cac328f838800a48c4d557c10dd",
"created_at": 1686159842,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"6fa3af2048f82399a81c9ef5aa9a6d88ff6b14b545801828e83f0dab2f1294d8",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"67193a6cde904e230908634d054f5a0c41698d20abcd66c946ec6d6b3539b254",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"b2b39b6f2c86908d3da9f500193abd5757b21cac328f838800a48c4d557c10dd"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2015-11-02\nš Original message:On 11/01/2015 07:30 PM, Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e If at least one year's notice was given, then people aren't going to\n\u003e lose their money, since they have notice.\n\nSo after realizing that I misread substantial portions of this thread\ndue to a lack of attention to detail I'd like to point out this:\n\nBitcoin nodes have the capability to validate blocks going back to the\ngenesis block, including blocks which would not be valid if mined today\nunder current rules.\n\nTherefore it must be the case that all the old consensus rules are\npreserved somewhere in the current code bases of the various\nimplementations.\n\nGiven that, there shouldn't be any technical barrier to validating input\nscripts according to the consensus rules that were in effect at the time\nthe input being spent was added to the blockchain.\n\nMaybe dealing with output is more difficult.\n\nHad every consensus rule change (deliberate and accidental) been\naccompanied by a version number bump, it would have been possible to\nphase out old versions without invaliding signed-but-unbroadcast\ntransactions by saying \"as of block height x, transactions with version\ny or lower are invalid unless their inputs are exclusively sourced from\nblocks with heights \u003c x\"\n\nIf there already have been rule changes which have retroactively\ninvalided unbroadcast transactions which were valid at the time they\nwere signed, those rules could be relaxed to not apply to transactions\nwhich exclusively spend inputs that existed before the rule change.\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: 0xEAD9E623.asc\nType: application/pgp-keys\nSize: 23337 bytes\nDesc: not available\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151102/30e16f8d/attachment-0001.bin\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 801 bytes\nDesc: OpenPGP digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151102/30e16f8d/attachment-0001.sig\u003e",
"sig": "adadf3e467284a30dfe805591292b868a591e3739d70e6fcc69d6be98dca5c0cb75f429b53449634e6dafad6d3e8d80570f0cae89cb796ad1e8ffdc8c471c377"
}