Delivery-date: Thu, 02 Oct 2025 15:32:00 -0700
Sender: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of freedom@reardencode.com designates 206.125.169.165 as permitted sender) client-ip=206.125.169.165;
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2025 15:27:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brandon Black <freedom@reardencode.com>
To: PortlandHODL <admin@qrsnap.io>
Cc: Bitcoin Development Mailing List <bitcoindev@googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <2e5be000-c054-44ea-818c-653dc11f0901@reardencode.com>
In-Reply-To: <6f6b570f-7f9d-40c0-a771-378eb2c0c701n@googlegroups.com>
References: <6f6b570f-7f9d-40c0-a771-378eb2c0c701n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] [BIP Proposal] Limit ScriptPubkey Size >= 520 Bytes Consensus.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_8_2525876.1759444069444"
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; contact bitcoindev+owners@googlegroups.com

------=_Part_8_2525876.1759444069444
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Love this idea.

I think "users will just use more outputs" is the one argument against. But=
 with witness size not limited in this way, I don't see that being a proble=
m.

If this avoids any of the fiddliness involved in avoiding DOS with GCC, I t=
hink we should do it.

Best,

Brandon
--Brandon, sent by an Android

Oct 2, 2025 15:00:22 PortlandHODL <admin@qrsnap.io>:

> Proposing: Softfork to after (n) block height; the creation of outpoints =
with greater than 520 bytes in the ScriptPubkey would be consensus invalid.
>=20
> This is my gathering of information per BIP 0002
>=20
> After doing some research into the number of outpoints that would have vi=
olated the proposed rule there are exactly 169 outpoints. With only 8 being=
 non OP_RETURN. I think after 15 years and not having discovered use for 'l=
arge' ScriptPubkeys; the reward for not invalidating them at the consensus =
level is lower than the risk of their abuse.=C2=A0
> * *Reasons for
>   * *Makes DoS blocks likely impossible to create that would have any suf=
ficient negative impact on the network.
>   * Leaves enough room for hooks long term
>   * Would substantially reduce the divergence between consensus=C2=A0 and=
 relay policy
>   * Incredibly little use onchain as evidenced above.
>   * Could possibly reduce codebase complexity. Legacy Script is largely c=
onsidered a mess though this isn't a complete disablement it should reduce =
the total surface that is problematic.
>   * Would make it harder to use the ScriptPubkey as a 'large' datacarrier=
.
>   * Possible UTXO set size bloat reduction.
>=20
> * *Reasons Against=C2=A0*
>   * Bitcoin could need it in the future? Quantum?
>   * Users could just create more outpoints.
> Thoughts?
>=20
> source of onchain data=C2=A0[https://github.com/portlandhodl/portlandhodl=
/blob/main/greater_520_pubkeys.csv]
>=20
> PortlandHODL
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups=
 "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an=
 email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoinde=
v/6f6b570f-7f9d-40c0-a771-378eb2c0c701n%40googlegroups.com[https://groups.g=
oogle.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6f6b570f-7f9d-40c0-a771-378eb2c0c701n%40google=
groups.com?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dfooter].

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/=
2e5be000-c054-44ea-818c-653dc11f0901%40reardencode.com.

------=_Part_8_2525876.1759444069444
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
 <head>
  <meta name=3D"viewport" content=3D"width=3Ddevice-width, initial-scale=3D=
1.0">
 </head>
 <body>
  <span dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;">Love this idea=
. </span>
  <br>
  <br><span dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;">I think "u=
sers will just use more outputs" is the one argument against. But with witn=
ess size not limited in this way, I don't see that being a problem. </span>
  <br>
  <br><span dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;">If this av=
oids any of the fiddliness involved in avoiding DOS with GCC, I think we sh=
ould do it.</span>
  <br>
  <br><span dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;">Best,</spa=
n>
  <br>
  <br><span dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;">Brandon</s=
pan>
  <br>
  <div class=3D"fairemail_signature">
   <span dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;">--Brandon, se=
nt by an Android</span>
   <br>
  </div>
  <div class=3D"fairemail_quote">
   <div dir=3D"ltr">
    <p>Oct 2, 2025 15:00:22 PortlandHODL &lt;admin@qrsnap.io&gt;:</p>
   </div>
   <blockquote style=3D"margin:0;border-left:3px solid #ccc; padding-left:1=
0px;">
    Proposing: Softfork to after (n) block height; the creation of outpoint=
s with greater than 520 bytes in the ScriptPubkey would be consensus invali=
d.=20
    <br>
    <br>
     This is my gathering of information per BIP 0002=20
    <br>
    <br>
     After doing some research into the number of outpoints that would have=
 violated the proposed rule there are exactly 169 outpoints. With only 8 be=
ing non OP_RETURN. I think after 15 years and not having discovered use for=
 'large' ScriptPubkeys; the reward for not invalidating them at the consens=
us level is lower than the risk of their abuse.&nbsp;=20
    <br>
    <ul>
     <li><b>Reasons for<br></b>
      <ul>
       <li>Makes DoS blocks likely impossible to create that would have any=
 sufficient negative impact on the network.</li>
       <li>Leaves enough room for hooks long term<br></li>
       <li>Would substantially reduce the divergence between consensus&nbsp=
; and relay policy</li>
       <li>Incredibly little use onchain as evidenced above.</li>
       <li>Could possibly reduce codebase complexity. Legacy Script is larg=
ely considered a mess though this isn't a complete disablement it should re=
duce the total surface that is problematic.</li>
       <li>Would make it harder to use the ScriptPubkey as a 'large' dataca=
rrier.</li>
       <li>Possible UTXO set size bloat reduction.<br><br></li>
      </ul></li>
     <li><b>Reasons Against&nbsp;</b>
      <ul>
       <li>Bitcoin could need it in the future? Quantum?<br></li>
       <li>Users could just create more outpoints.</li>
      </ul></li>
    </ul>Thoughts?=20
    <br>
    <br><a href=3D"https://github.com/portlandhodl/portlandhodl/blob/main/g=
reater_520_pubkeys.csv">source of onchain data&nbsp;</a>
    <br>
    <br>
     PortlandHODL=20
    <br>
    <br>
    <p></p> --=20
    <br>
     You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gro=
ups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.=20
    <br>
     To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send=
 an email to <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">bit=
coindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.=20
    <br>
     To view this discussion visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/m=
sgid/bitcoindev/6f6b570f-7f9d-40c0-a771-378eb2c0c701n%40googlegroups.com?ut=
m_medium=3Demail&amp;utm_source=3Dfooter">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid=
/bitcoindev/6f6b570f-7f9d-40c0-a771-378eb2c0c701n%40googlegroups.com</a>.=
=20
    <br>
   </blockquote>
  </div>
 </body>
</html>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">bitcoind=
ev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To view this discussion visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
bitcoindev/2e5be000-c054-44ea-818c-653dc11f0901%40reardencode.com?utm_mediu=
m=3Demail&utm_source=3Dfooter">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev=
/2e5be000-c054-44ea-818c-653dc11f0901%40reardencode.com</a>.<br />

------=_Part_8_2525876.1759444069444--