Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0077DC002B for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 11:49:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBCB140516 for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 11:49:36 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org CBCB140516 Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=SynXOUvL X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.602 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LLncAzJswW8C for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 11:49:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org E767F403F8 Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E767F403F8 for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 11:49:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE8B43200970; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 06:49:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 02 Feb 2023 06:49:35 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm3; t=1675338574; x=1675424974; bh=2N/uPVQlHrd6xF87gBvTpac3DzRS OWjG2LSBF6msMec=; b=SynXOUvL/KNeiCtGJBqIQHcn7psIIcfwqoakX25+0JVv UcSYQPRx5Q4CWAkq2ThFp2iyWhveHGCA0FcK97fwWkkUk909Zi0I7cEn8xnTK4WP ur8aG03qw+vc4dqvgeOcT5UcgHhEhgqbYBXG7K/ayd78QqVr3vlVSOBAWWoOnxM7 K39NTAPsPPTzckAvjMenOUIc3atjV78X6JjRSOZGmEFJYSqR2X3HDbPkjQAJ9DVh XldMQ4SKgFhEPC4roz4MPufJKr3VfKw9m0dhkkj3vZzlPB9t2F5P4Vgd1DykEN6z T8XJszJP+JYmG2CfK5NXoZPSg8o9eTDk1H4HcMhKNA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrudefkedgfedvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvfevuffkfhggtggujgesghdtreertddtvdenucfhrhhomheprfgvthgv rhcuvfhougguuceophgvthgvsehpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhgqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeelvdellefftddukeduffejgfefjeeuheeileeftdfgteduteeggeevueethfej tdenucffohhmrghinhepphgvthgvrhhtohguugdrohhrghenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiii gvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehpvghtvgesphgvthgvrhhtohguugdr ohhrgh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 06:49:33 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 98F525F824; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 06:49:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2023 06:49:32 -0500 From: Peter Todd To: Aymeric Vitte Message-ID: References: <764E460B-C0C6-47B8-A97E-F7CBC81FD645@petertodd.org> <16446c77-c9de-7b11-8e66-7f8e20421cba@peersm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Tp7te20Rjsb6/KCw" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <16446c77-c9de-7b11-8e66-7f8e20421cba@peersm.com> Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Debate: 64 bytes in OP_RETURN VS taproot OP_FALSE OP_IF OP_PUSH X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2023 11:49:37 -0000 --Tp7te20Rjsb6/KCw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 12:45:42PM +0100, Aymeric Vitte wrote: > As far as I can read nobody replied to the initial question: what is > considered as good/best practice to store in Bitcoin? Your answer is beyond not putting unspendable data in the UTXO set, the exa= ct details don't really matter. Do what makes sense for your specific applicat= ion. > Reiterating my question: what are the current rules for OP_RETURN, max > size and number of OP_RETURN per tx Max 80 bytes, one OpReturn output per tx. This of course is the standardness rule. With a miner willing to mine non-s= td transactions anything goes. --=20 https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org --Tp7te20Rjsb6/KCw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE0RcYcKRzsEwFZ3N5Lly11TVRLzcFAmPbo0oACgkQLly11TVR LzefxRAAvisE/VX7D1nS8BIp02iwBESfG/HEb5obKINPgY9RYGtk6oc+vHhZZICA C6CL80YcBgvCTkRY/D6/0AYjpgaI8K87aRbhktht4PJ9f2JeUue/rvDGY++YW75A YDg02E7+ipN/5NdRd79YZAmUVOO4nl8ibIaWw1f58ibdxqNnF0Nc8OduNdE5mcke visEdapfQ5eVa7LzyTFTERrZqOiofzOmPCPWgpbqfFtYhOYszUXnsum7fIbPuVId uZB9B+h2Yq07aupgVqKVkrzzSY0B8tbAEx+vkZly+3m01jwEbksxKcPeq5gmH7o8 zmMjWyxx6JjCsZ6711losikgJhdt0hZb40zxeVP5fSRtxvhg9ZmpBvIxjtiMle2F YgRojYQCQwU2HIRMLfhPdCCIvVWH4YH2wayGPB8W2nDe8dDHyYvQnVxNXQeqhr4K 7ci0G1REXfLW49AB+Q7D48lumXfRiQOEhorqWbg0BKyNplfZteQ4LqBoekVkGAxC j+tkltvircFiFl2UokEdia3TLaPQ5F3HCGFI5ZSbErUYdeFQMZvvncP9YrRykMjL XAvXGDl0uXKaOkx7YBd/kLfg28iDxguY21d0Q2XeuZcufMHIUut99xakVs3YkW92 IvGadrW58eoQeQJ7zvXxtPIa7e3wybgvO/XOZYBSZ73wY2epL7U= =IKGT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Tp7te20Rjsb6/KCw--