Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <pete@petertodd.org>) id 1XZNMI-0003dU-7x
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Wed, 01 Oct 2014 17:06:34 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
	designates 62.13.148.98 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=62.13.148.98; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
	helo=outmail148098.authsmtp.com; 
Received: from outmail148098.authsmtp.com ([62.13.148.98])
	by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	id 1XZNMD-00041y-AV for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Wed, 01 Oct 2014 17:06:34 +0000
Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235])
	by punt17.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id s91H6DG9082916;
	Wed, 1 Oct 2014 18:06:13 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [25.109.142.54] ([24.114.48.154]) (authenticated bits=0)
	by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id s91H6AXA086458
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Wed, 1 Oct 2014 18:06:11 +0100 (BST)
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <542C1DEC.8010007@certimix.com>
References: <20141001130826.GM28710@savin.petertodd.org>
	<542C1DEC.8010007@certimix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 13:06:03 -0400
To: Sergio Lerner <sergiolerner@certimix.com>,
	bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Message-ID: <C9E1D7CC-B4F8-4428-8AB8-E199ECA7BFAD@petertodd.org>
X-Server-Quench: 3f0aaa55-498d-11e4-b396-002590a15da7
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
	http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
	aAdMdgMUF1YAAgsB AmIbWlxeUFt7WGE7 aQ5PbARZfE5GQQRv
	VFdNRFdNFUsrCB15 AG92Ixl6cQFDcDB5 ZE5hEHMNXBUrJEN4
	X0pdHTkbZGY1bH1N U0leagNUcgZDfk5E bwQuUz1vNG8XDQg5
	AwQ0PjZ0MThBJSBS WgQAK04nCXUhPwZ0 SwoLEykaVWYlag4Q
	CzsNCWI9OWsvH38T H2ppHBogKRIMBwtC V0gFHD9eOkVJSTAs
	CEtQUE8YH3VGWSpa HlU1JANJBnRbXGJV FFNEURgTCiRDGDVJ TTs1
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 24.114.48.154/465
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
	anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
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 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
X-Headers-End: 1XZNMD-00041y-AV
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [BIP draft] CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY - Prevent
	a txout from being spent until an expiration time
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: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 17:06:34 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Yeah, there are lots of "upper-level" details to consider; I'm not going to pretend that BIP is complete yet. My thinking is that the first release should include my NOPx blacklist pull-req, and leave NOP2/CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY in that blacklist for another minor release or two.


On 1 October 2014 11:29:48 GMT-04:00, Sergio Lerner <sergiolerner@certimix.com> wrote:
>I like the proposal.
>
>I suggest that applications and nodes should only broadcast
>transactions
>having OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY a few blocks after the timeout value.
>If a node broadcasts a TX having OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY and nLockTime
>is
>equal to the current height and equal to the timeout value, but that
>peer is one block behind in the blockchain, the transaction will be
>rejected by the peer and the source will be banned.
>
>Another option will be not to ban peers sending transactions failing to
>verify OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY , but I don't like this.
>
>Still another option would be that the sender checks periodically the
>height of it's peers (using the version command) in order to be sure to
>send the transaction having OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY only to the peers
>that are up to date with the blockchain.
>
>Regards,
> Sergio.
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer
>Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS
>Reports
>Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper
>Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer
>http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>_______________________________________________
>Bitcoin-development mailing list
>Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: APG v1.1.1

iQFQBAEBCAA6BQJULDR7MxxQZXRlciBUb2RkIChsb3cgc2VjdXJpdHkga2V5KSA8
cGV0ZUBwZXRlcnRvZGQub3JnPgAKCRAZnIM7qOfwhS8ACADKQYHqOvmKJBYv+ZZM
Vs6358sMEtHGIEoTEjPio/vGbM0TkCGvRAnvzXDYz20WQcQsWZ4jflP1BihdbszE
NrQ+4JYm11Sw6vK5RpxeI4rJSb/hMUJooR0WQn8TOSZowtVxhINUnBku+N21Dhuf
IBCzji5bW2wjeN50psWOjJkBo1gZP761tjfmpI9kdNFe6RYIceAIWIIhccKX4PhA
FucuPawjB8+Ajd707UGHew82VHbXis+6Oxzob7hVJRH/wNKpkR6LXRxh2dwVaRAw
/Eytbt8LZRcRZGNXvMZ4GKG0xP79cBQI30QhrgM88gGyioMxrWcP2hVhtADOVl40
E4yh
=C9fu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----