Return-Path: <mark@friedenbach.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D22AA9C
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Mon, 24 Aug 2015 02:37:22 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ig0-f179.google.com (mail-ig0-f179.google.com
	[209.85.213.179])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78520178
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Mon, 24 Aug 2015 02:37:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by igcse8 with SMTP id se8so36848191igc.1
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:37:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
	h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
	:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
	bh=UGPT5YfV+SIzW6WgQdo61o2MPH0Bsct4Fv+CdKfLBxs=;
	b=g285HCLyWiQhSbNQNS8rw7DikPWbGvvCAwhk8nzafIeVGQlijfeT8jdp9RABvH0ERE
	yI8u37ZHeA1p9SKZpqG7phpvlpFDEG0CD0rcQmqlGzaqhidB7t5l+9VPZAFKy5/o7eNw
	C7/48g9Qkm+TvC0koDCNc4yl1yB0YFVifGkDhzYVAjlB7FvxzimH9TNIfBWb6pZ3Zye5
	jQZHJyrOByBoB08HsTGxDAytaoJP2TzRNFE/aSk6viTiV57H499KY4rq3IYK49MPzxzp
	hYkCjrLqW9aPW4X6GfMOefKZll6qFOvMUTjx8/FX18nS93U9PHCk8ScR+4nQUJlrmLlz
	OnCw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlwvhUDlBh3tklRXc5reP6ARjrOKHxbuUKlw0ZIV0qDkNiKbPucKTWi4N86CpsW/pkYf/31
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.43.227 with SMTP id z3mr12118791igl.22.1440383840916;
	Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:37:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.107.138.14 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:37:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [172.56.30.71]
Received: by 10.107.138.14 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:37:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDqW7OGuyZ1BTTeeivDf9wFVsAK9AaGYm8XWwLb2O2Lb+g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADJgMztgE_GkbrsP7zCEHNPA3P6T=aSFfhkcN-q=gVhWP0vKXg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADJgMzv8G3EqLBwEYRHJZ+fO_Jwzy0koi2pJ_iNRkXmoVarGcg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDod9z6ksgaCv86qFCyKLTQSL3+oNns+__5H77hVhs05DQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOG=w-sbOcaogkic2i4A5eZnBQ79LUibsGy0dyKyvQg53ktY1Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<55DA6470.9040301@thinlink.com>
	<CAAS2fgQKQpHu-nC1uSrigDx2JLUt64p-LqidVmiuULDE0MJCFQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDqW7OGuyZ1BTTeeivDf9wFVsAK9AaGYm8XWwLb2O2Lb+g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:37:20 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOG=w-ubk3nPfxy25Hd6kPeehf7vnYD5chksLWU5wU2t=jL5TA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org>
To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0111c0162db479051e057f23
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP-draft] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - An opcode for
 relative locktime
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 02:37:22 -0000

--089e0111c0162db479051e057f23
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

A power of 2 would be far more efficient here. The key question is how long
of a relative block time do you need? Figure out what the maximum should be
( I don't know what that would be, any ideas?) and then see how many bits
you have left over.
On Aug 23, 2015 7:23 PM, "Jorge Tim=C3=B3n" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > Seperately, to Mark and Btcdrank: Adding an extra wrinkel to the
> > discussion has any thought been given to represent one block with more
> > than one increment?  This would leave additional space for future
> > signaling, or allow, for example, higher resolution numbers for a
> > sharechain commitement.
>
> No, I don't think anybody thought about this. I just explained this to
> Pieter using "for example, 10 instead of 1".
> He suggested 600 increments so that it is more similar to timestamps.
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>

--089e0111c0162db479051e057f23
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr">A power of 2 would be far more efficient here. The key quest=
ion is how long of a relative block time do you need? Figure out what the m=
aximum should be ( I don&#39;t know what that would be, any ideas?) and the=
n see how many bits you have left over.</p>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Aug 23, 2015 7:23 PM, &quot;Jorge Tim=C3=B3n&=
quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-=
dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><block=
quote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc=
 solid;padding-left:1ex">On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Gregory Maxwell v=
ia bitcoin-dev<br>
&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@li=
sts.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; Seperately, to Mark and Btcdrank: Adding an extra wrinkel to the<br>
&gt; discussion has any thought been given to represent one block with more=
<br>
&gt; than one increment?=C2=A0 This would leave additional space for future=
<br>
&gt; signaling, or allow, for example, higher resolution numbers for a<br>
&gt; sharechain commitement.<br>
<br>
No, I don&#39;t think anybody thought about this. I just explained this to<=
br>
Pieter using &quot;for example, 10 instead of 1&quot;.<br>
He suggested 600 increments so that it is more similar to timestamps.<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>

--089e0111c0162db479051e057f23--