Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <gavinandresen@gmail.com>) id 1WHyeh-0008MO-Im
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 24 Feb 2014 16:45:23 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.213.49 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.213.49; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-yh0-f49.google.com; 
Received: from mail-yh0-f49.google.com ([209.85.213.49])
	by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1WHyef-0003I0-RH
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 24 Feb 2014 16:45:23 +0000
Received: by mail-yh0-f49.google.com with SMTP id t59so5497189yho.36
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Mon, 24 Feb 2014 08:45:16 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.236.50.194 with SMTP id z42mr1991795yhb.145.1393260316165;
	Mon, 24 Feb 2014 08:45:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.170.133.213 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Feb 2014 08:45:16 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJC1FgCW9spkViMPvuWNS84Ys33pj=RP1ZpzBCa++e-iMQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJHLa0PXHY1qisXhN98DMxgp11ouqkzYMBvrTTNOtwX09T1kZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+s+GJC1FgCW9spkViMPvuWNS84Ys33pj=RP1ZpzBCa++e-iMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 11:45:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CABsx9T1qrmgu7nBF4yOsFfUjMrqpGK-J_GeCqWswZskO59B0ZA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c1d968398eb904f329b288
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
	sender-domain
	0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
	(gavinandresen[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	1.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
	author's domain
	0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
	not necessarily valid
	-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1WHyef-0003I0-RH
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] On OP_RETURN in upcoming 0.9 release
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 16:45:23 -0000

--001a11c1d968398eb904f329b288
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

40 bytes is small enough to never require an OP_PUSHDATA1, too, which will
make writing the OP_RETURN-as-standard BIP simpler.


On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com> wrote:
>
>> A common IRC proposal seems to lean towards reducing that from 80.
>> I'll leave it to the crowd to argue about size from there. I do think
>> regular transactions should have the ability to include some metadata.
>>
>
> I'd be in favor of bringing it down to 40 for 0.9.
>
> That'd be enough for <8 byte header/identifier><32 byte hash>.
>
> 80, as the standard line length, is almost asking for "insert your
> graffiti message here". I also see no need for 64 bytes hashes such as
> SHA512 in the context of bitcoin, as that only offers 256-bit security (at
> most) in the first place.
>
> And if this is not abused, these kind of transactions become popular, and
> more space is really needed, the limit can always be increased in a future
> version.
>
> Wladimir
>



-- 
--
Gavin Andresen

--001a11c1d968398eb904f329b288
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">40 bytes is small enough to never require an OP_PUSHDATA1,=
 too, which will make writing the OP_RETURN-as-standard BIP simpler.<div><b=
r></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mon, F=
eb 24, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Wladimir <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:l=
aanwj@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">laanwj@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<b=
r>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_ext=
ra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div class=3D"">On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 5:03=
 PM, Jeff Garzik <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:jgarzik@bitpay.com=
" target=3D"_blank">jgarzik@bitpay.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>

</div><div class=3D""><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px=
 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">A c=
ommon IRC proposal seems to lean towards reducing that from 80.<br>
I&#39;ll leave it to the crowd to argue about size from there. I do think<b=
r>
regular transactions should have the ability to include some metadata.<br><=
/blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>I&#39;d be in favor of bringing it do=
wn to 40 for 0.9. <br><br>That&#39;d be enough for &lt;8 byte header/identi=
fier&gt;&lt;32 byte hash&gt;. <br>

<br>80, as the standard line length, is almost asking for &quot;insert your=
 graffiti message here&quot;. I also see no need for 64 bytes hashes such a=
s SHA512 in the context of bitcoin, as that only offers 256-bit security (a=
t most) in the first place.<br>

<br></div><div>And if this is not abused, these kind of transactions become=
 popular, and more space is really needed, the limit can always be increase=
d in a future version.<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><br></=
font></span></div>
<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><div><br></div><div>Wladimir=
<br></div></font></span></div>
</div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></div>-- <br>--<br>Gavin =
Andresen<br>
</div></div>

--001a11c1d968398eb904f329b288--