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'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, "Jorge Tim=C3=B3n&= quot; <<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-= dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> 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> <<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@li= sts.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br> > Seperately, to Mark and Btcdrank: Adding an extra wrinkel to the<br> > discussion has any thought been given to represent one block with more= <br> > than one increment?=C2=A0 This would leave additional space for future= <br> > signaling, or allow, for example, higher resolution numbers for a<br> > sharechain commitement.<br> <br> No, I don't think anybody thought about this. I just explained this to<= br> Pieter using "for example, 10 instead of 1".<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--