📅 Original date posted:2018-05-03
📝 Original message:
Hey Christian,
On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:51:01PM +0200, Christian Decker wrote:
> The setup transaction is simply a transaction that spends some funds and
> creates a single output, which has the script from Figure 2, but since
> that would be a forward reference, I decided to handwave and call it a
> multisig. A simple fix would be to change the setup phase bullet point
> at the beginning of section 3, would that be sufficient?
A first clarification, which just regards the naming, would be to use
just one of "setup transaction" and "funding transaction". The symbol
T_{u,0} is only used once, on page 6. I'd either remove it, or used it
in other places (Fig. 1?), too.
Without your mail (thanks!) I did not see that the setup transaction
output is complicated (has branches) as shown in Fig. 2. A clarification
at the named bullet point would indeed help (although I see the issue of
forward references).
One idea (just to get my idea across, I'm sure you can do better):
old: "to a 2-of-2 multisig address"
new: "to a script making use of 2-of-2 multisig"
> If instead of calling it a multisig we call it a multiparty output and
> reference the script in Figure 2, that'd be addressed as well.
I agree.
> Well, it has arbitrary inputs, and a single output with the script from
> Figure 2, in the non-trigger case, and in the trigger case it'd be just
> a `2 A B 2 OP_CMSV`.
Got it. Follow up question: would a second output (change) be OK? I see
some advantages, but I'm not sure if it would work.
Thanks
Carsten
--
andrena objects ag
Ganghoferstraße 70
80339 München
http://www.andrena.de
Vorstand: Hagen Buchwald, Dr. Dieter Kuhn, Stefan Schürle
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Rolf Hetzelberger
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Karlsruhe
Amtsgericht Mannheim, HRB 109694
USt-IdNr. DE174314824
Bitte beachten Sie auch unsere anstehenden Veranstaltungen:
http://www.andrena.de/events
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20180503/e1f0770c/attachment.sig>;
Carsten Otto [ARCHIVE] /
npub13f…tgaqs
2023-06-09 12:50:22
in reply to nevent1q…q0yy
Author Public Key
npub13fccestrh5xf26m53n73xn5yly9z040a4n9vq30mernkj0cqszuq9tgaqsPublished at
2023-06-09 12:50:22Event JSON
{
"id": "1b1dabc15b9887541ee95613ceb9e5585d99e9e2d7c1672078fb7ec69a06c884",
"pubkey": "8a718cc163bd0c956b748cfd134e84f90a27d5fdaccac045fbc8e7693f0080b8",
"created_at": 1686315022,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"8810a687a398ff4253aa82a57b227d1be6d62119c3d2aac97b46109ae04c407a",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"39c1fc91700e3e077f6b8bc09218b14c2afe653cfaed6d5b33b594dc87e4a827",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"72cd40332ec782dd0a7f63acb03e3b6fdafa6d91bd1b6125cd8b7117a1bb8057"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2018-05-03\n📝 Original message:\nHey Christian,\n\nOn Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:51:01PM +0200, Christian Decker wrote:\n\u003e The setup transaction is simply a transaction that spends some funds and\n\u003e creates a single output, which has the script from Figure 2, but since\n\u003e that would be a forward reference, I decided to handwave and call it a\n\u003e multisig. A simple fix would be to change the setup phase bullet point\n\u003e at the beginning of section 3, would that be sufficient?\n\nA first clarification, which just regards the naming, would be to use\njust one of \"setup transaction\" and \"funding transaction\". The symbol\nT_{u,0} is only used once, on page 6. I'd either remove it, or used it\nin other places (Fig. 1?), too.\n\nWithout your mail (thanks!) I did not see that the setup transaction\noutput is complicated (has branches) as shown in Fig. 2. A clarification\nat the named bullet point would indeed help (although I see the issue of\nforward references).\n\nOne idea (just to get my idea across, I'm sure you can do better):\n old: \"to a 2-of-2 multisig address\"\n new: \"to a script making use of 2-of-2 multisig\"\n\n\u003e If instead of calling it a multisig we call it a multiparty output and\n\u003e reference the script in Figure 2, that'd be addressed as well.\n\nI agree.\n\n\u003e Well, it has arbitrary inputs, and a single output with the script from\n\u003e Figure 2, in the non-trigger case, and in the trigger case it'd be just\n\u003e a `2 A B 2 OP_CMSV`.\n\nGot it. Follow up question: would a second output (change) be OK? I see\nsome advantages, but I'm not sure if it would work.\n\nThanks\nCarsten\n-- \nandrena objects ag\nGanghoferstraße 70\n80339 München\n\nhttp://www.andrena.de\n\nVorstand: Hagen Buchwald, Dr. Dieter Kuhn, Stefan Schürle\nAufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Rolf Hetzelberger\n\nSitz der Gesellschaft: Karlsruhe\nAmtsgericht Mannheim, HRB 109694\nUSt-IdNr. DE174314824\n\nBitte beachten Sie auch unsere anstehenden Veranstaltungen:\nhttp://www.andrena.de/events\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 195 bytes\nDesc: not available\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20180503/e1f0770c/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "ad0ae7e1da6390df5b4933f76fd73d929c5271b3aac7404286265fc3b9bf4609f9eb7ad30e1fe6e767ab0e3b27ba4a523f6d5ac14e853b33f6ed55bf28d9b47d"
}