📅 Original date posted:2015-09-01
📝 Original message:Rather than using an inhumanly long hex string from the genesis hash to
distinguish between mainnet and testnet, why not use the network magic
bytes instead? Much shorter, just as distinct.
I'd still prefer a common network name mapping for the sake of humanity.
Few bitcoin library implementations use the same string names for mainnet
and testnet. This BIP could simply define one string name alias for each
supported network and leave mapping to local lingo to the implementors.
-Danny
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Jorge Timón <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 9:01 PM, Matt Whitlock via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > That's still not right, since "mainnet" and "testnet" are not host names.
> >
> > You'd have to do something like:
> >
> >
> blockchain:?network=testnet&txid=3b95a766d7a99b87188d6875c8484cb2b310b78459b7816d4dfc3f0f7e04281a
>
> I would really prefer chain=<chainID> over network=<chainPetnameStr>
> By chainID I mean the hash of the genesis block, see
>
> https://github.com/jtimon/bitcoin/commit/3191d5e8e75687a27cf466b7a4c70bdc04809d39
> I'm completely fine with doing that using an optional parameter (for
> backwards compatibility).
>
> I agree with Andreas Schildbach that respecting the most commonly used
> schemes is desirable.
> So my preference would be:
>
>
> /tx/3b95a766d7a99b87188d6875c8484cb2b310b78459b7816d4dfc3f0f7e04281a?chain=000000000933ea01ad0ee984209779baaec3ced90fa3f408719526f8d77f4943
>
> (a tx in testnet)
>
>
> /block/00000000000000000b0d504d142ac8bdd1a2721d19f423a8146d0d6de882167b?chain=000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8ce26f
>
> (a block in bitcoin's mainnet)
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150901/bd5d758c/attachment.html>;
Danny Thorpe [ARCHIVE] /
npub1q5…3ps87
2023-06-07 17:39:11
in reply to nevent1q…76zw
Author Public Key
npub1q5sgcakfxhw3ya93tvnpqeacvf32p6lw70hke53rkjnf9lhw9w8s43ps87Published at
2023-06-07 17:39:11Event JSON
{
"id": "071dd0aba2fd0c730c79ad03b37007e6b06f2ce9473132a70caaa676a527a103",
"pubkey": "05208c76c935dd1274b15b261067b86262a0ebeef3ef6cd223b4a692feee2b8f",
"created_at": 1686159551,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"adae20868ecaee3485c1f73b7cbb076c6c1ffdd38a33c7ea438129dbb9aa31c8",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"8a6a70669d430f6c4a59a38ba037e6ed464974ebe99ef6c69ce9b4cb360d9b11",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5407287b78a2060becfadcd1d33e3ebc59ea39863ac2da5309beed2d37a80186"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-09-01\n📝 Original message:Rather than using an inhumanly long hex string from the genesis hash to\ndistinguish between mainnet and testnet, why not use the network magic\nbytes instead? Much shorter, just as distinct.\n\nI'd still prefer a common network name mapping for the sake of humanity.\nFew bitcoin library implementations use the same string names for mainnet\nand testnet. This BIP could simply define one string name alias for each\nsupported network and leave mapping to local lingo to the implementors.\n\n-Danny\n\nOn Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Jorge Timón \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 9:01 PM, Matt Whitlock via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003e That's still not right, since \"mainnet\" and \"testnet\" are not host names.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e You'd have to do something like:\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e blockchain:?network=testnet\u0026txid=3b95a766d7a99b87188d6875c8484cb2b310b78459b7816d4dfc3f0f7e04281a\n\u003e\n\u003e I would really prefer chain=\u003cchainID\u003e over network=\u003cchainPetnameStr\u003e\n\u003e By chainID I mean the hash of the genesis block, see\n\u003e\n\u003e https://github.com/jtimon/bitcoin/commit/3191d5e8e75687a27cf466b7a4c70bdc04809d39\n\u003e I'm completely fine with doing that using an optional parameter (for\n\u003e backwards compatibility).\n\u003e\n\u003e I agree with Andreas Schildbach that respecting the most commonly used\n\u003e schemes is desirable.\n\u003e So my preference would be:\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e /tx/3b95a766d7a99b87188d6875c8484cb2b310b78459b7816d4dfc3f0f7e04281a?chain=000000000933ea01ad0ee984209779baaec3ced90fa3f408719526f8d77f4943\n\u003e\n\u003e (a tx in testnet)\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e /block/00000000000000000b0d504d142ac8bdd1a2721d19f423a8146d0d6de882167b?chain=000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8ce26f\n\u003e\n\u003e (a block in bitcoin's mainnet)\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150901/bd5d758c/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "c3fd7c24d1dcf700172b1e0a2de23757d83da48b2637dae08db9bce9f5ee26eb4d35458039daffdf63fcb475a11d4c39cbe2f8238f891728e6dc0650d4d07872"
}