š
Original date posted:2011-11-09
šļø Summary of this message: Creating a separate P2P network for off-band information is better than involving the blockchain, as miners could remove extra scriptSig information.
š Original message:It's propably best to create a separate p2p network for off-band
information like this. No need to involve the blockchain with it.
- Joel
On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 16:18 -0500, Gavin Andresen wrote:
> One more thought on putting arbitrary stuff in the scriptSig:
>
> Miners could decide to revolt and remove the extra scriptSig
> information before including the transaction in their blocks. They'd
> still get the full transaction fee, and the transaction would still
> validate so the block would be accepted by everybody else.
>
> Come to think of it, if a node relaying transactions wanted to save
> bandwidth costs or be annoying, it could also strip off the extra
> information before forwarding it, so this isn't a reliable
> communication mechanism. It is probably a much better idea to use
> another protocol to gather signatures.
>
Joel Joonatan Kaartinen [ARCHIVE] /
npub165ā¦48xrx
2023-06-07 02:38:35
in reply to nevent1qā¦5m00
Author Public Key
npub1654pkuj4rway0043gcu6rdh4umxescp7ew42d2czqvts3kwvg3esc48xrxPublished at
2023-06-07 02:38:35Event JSON
{
"id": "848e28ddb19bc764c4d89909ef7f46e6bae6f5c65d4ef9ee59527f50b4759c48",
"pubkey": "d52a1b72551bba47beb14639a1b6f5e6cd98603ecbaaa6ab02031708d9cc4473",
"created_at": 1686105515,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"a7fd8b1daaa858237747bd2300e513940cf62340eedfc2d0e5c06a3e24e868d2",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"2e58089cdc5eea79d8fa7f679733c4921f8a619a523ef6fcba24326e6ce4e056",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"857f2f78dc1639e711f5ea703a9fc978e22ebd279abdea1861b7daa833512ee4"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2011-11-09\nšļø Summary of this message: Creating a separate P2P network for off-band information is better than involving the blockchain, as miners could remove extra scriptSig information.\nš Original message:It's propably best to create a separate p2p network for off-band\ninformation like this. No need to involve the blockchain with it.\n\n- Joel\n\nOn Wed, 2011-11-09 at 16:18 -0500, Gavin Andresen wrote:\n\u003e One more thought on putting arbitrary stuff in the scriptSig:\n\u003e \n\u003e Miners could decide to revolt and remove the extra scriptSig\n\u003e information before including the transaction in their blocks. They'd\n\u003e still get the full transaction fee, and the transaction would still\n\u003e validate so the block would be accepted by everybody else.\n\u003e \n\u003e Come to think of it, if a node relaying transactions wanted to save\n\u003e bandwidth costs or be annoying, it could also strip off the extra\n\u003e information before forwarding it, so this isn't a reliable\n\u003e communication mechanism. It is probably a much better idea to use\n\u003e another protocol to gather signatures.\n\u003e",
"sig": "99c67a6641e4e8d39491a522f6c6c4daf3eb0c95f595849b774e91e3a9da0da170da1527dc1e294108bce81a0e71b61a271e6675153d620b3e6b4def7597546a"
}