Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2797F1567 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 07:07:30 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from APC01-HK2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-oln040092255075.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.92.255.75]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF73C322 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 07:07:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=live.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=U4n88cwBIgUOJ38LZyFf23PuW9RN+YmvI9YwtkNAgkE=; b=Ef02c/BIExCu/CSmcoMDJiFvF/BS9dP2yeEb0DmgxgkHpAcrCaVef4aWY36RiBS47hRej3040eDiGBI9dBEF6Y6jIp59MN24VyaYBuyPmSor5kfix5RGVu97PA6XHu96Zm+M6/o8Q2g8w2gFXA6kHDOnRg7Et6PHWXz4jooykybAUuHKtiaW+CS1lEhABscV29cYVHK909+w7otzUxHVTcPVxph3yEwPbwlYWZA8aNr5XhpGfKHDfDDhqX6QNwpj5BZp5tv6zUooros0V3wU+I1x5uDwo9C9693gKmVTsXKaaspVA3aFMoQc3Kr6vsOOdF6aKIr28C+faEkvyDc/5g== Received: from HK2APC01FT115.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.248.55) by HK2APC01HT185.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.249.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.20.464.13; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 07:07:26 +0000 Received: from PS2P216MB0179.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (10.152.248.57) by HK2APC01FT115.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.248.194) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.20.464.13 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 07:07:26 +0000 Received: from PS2P216MB0179.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([10.171.225.19]) by PS2P216MB0179.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([10.171.225.19]) with mapi id 15.20.0464.016; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 07:07:26 +0000 From: Damian Williamson To: CANNON , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Thread-Topic: [bitcoin-dev] NIST 8202 Blockchain Technology Overview Thread-Index: AQHTmJpgegxCeHJ6V0iUR+o+RB3SuKOLpjcAgAIxu1CACNWVAIAAUtNc Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 07:07:26 +0000 Message-ID: References: <6d24833d-f127-04ea-d180-c69409de16a5@cannon-ciota.info> <6d92d8da-052d-f997-f441-0713acd72e85@cannon-ciota.info> , In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-AU, en-US Content-Language: en-AU X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:2071DF96D62E633D97ADB007DD28F25ADBEE3590A6BABAF8F6283EB14B4F1E25; UpperCasedChecksum:EB795F34A853792FBBA657C44AC298A2A2FD4375FE26466070138B91B09AE0CF; SizeAsReceived:7281; Count:46 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-tmn: [ZK/wQhDj5Qs4NUhB9F1dftx5DEPhiOra] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; HK2APC01HT185; 6:rTcU6NkF/Y8fZQIe93wn0PdKJJP2qWRISi4sM3XPAVtxoeHfsazNg2OFX0Igz6qeYYPYA0KNF5OQuqs18NXBLQUGXH0TdwRjCoT1YeyU4Kqu12vYuG11/mJ/bHXWLNF9RAIBwd3Uu7rClIcU0FrCpv09Y/q5XJV5Qntg2slhNq6o+ZdXnN4EIOgysrO5wip4CuML+ZTUbeUWdiCFPT18ePTfWhleAkHmVXe24GPWB60Vs6pqDtaLpvuJckdzaF0ZD1R+rtsOZMxAPikr+HzdDgoXN7eBKdDQQf/inBI6w210bcVX5zLRRMgD90u0andqJSEJ/zYymr9o50e/ACwQ07lYlPFAZZdHbJt+mAjdE8o=; 5:fhTY22pIKrOdQhMxAMfme7zUbv0sDOHHuqj9eLx5hHbL0bp49qw1n7eySeYSf3PLyxoG+rF4xtagMJyR0DDaMOTQel/4S8AsNCyu4HAu3lcG9FtnSqkxHTxX+Cv+rcN1h4geL3S2/RN4pjXoZM3W0A/RaEujwQRwDJkWpLTEgNU=; 24:2ZIbszYpVokpLfJxhhLhAki4CCRTs1HPx4kosDL3vOYxjpqG3NG2t8MBig9NVHv/3996pJUAjwbiJb8RXbJWHCX/VEs84M60jaeFHEanFGw=; 7:uMZmuxIURu1YjZBWr+EA4bKYIhm97+iSsTMahNNHfHGvS9ceyhdHBOu38QgXNv6Pyqhp/yAWb8wOp5MgfGdY0od3gFOh1hVIQfv70UD23Xx0y/+L1jLNJt0TCgZt6LiUZK+E4k5lpem3xmK+nVYtRLsHd6oPbAQyiADl1ywQy+s1V8/j5W8o1LXyr4RT3veEyOCxb2EKiPYU6EZaE3cTi9vZ1IjjOXC9DXzkVgT1Rv+AzciAmBo3wmilZsJz/TLF x-incomingheadercount: 46 x-eopattributedmessage: 0 x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(201702061074)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(2017031320274)(2017031324274)(2017031323274)(2017031322404)(1601125374)(1603101448)(1701031045); SRVR:HK2APC01HT185; x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HK2APC01HT185: x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: df7b9aee-5b9a-41e4-6a18-08d56d304736 x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(444000031); SRVR:HK2APC01HT185; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:HK2APC01HT185; x-forefront-prvs: 0575F81B58 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(7070007)(98901004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1901; SCL:1; SRVR:HK2APC01HT185; H:PS2P216MB0179.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:; spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_PS2P216MB0179C3CDAB11D24B7BE6880C9DFD0PS2P216MB0179KORP_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: df7b9aee-5b9a-41e4-6a18-08d56d304736 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Feb 2018 07:07:26.3086 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HK2APC01HT185 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 07 Feb 2018 04:47:15 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] NIST 8202 Blockchain Technology Overview X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 07:07:30 -0000 --_000_PS2P216MB0179C3CDAB11D24B7BE6880C9DFD0PS2P216MB0179KORP_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Then you have my apology, I will not claim to be any kind of advocate or us= er of Bitcoin Cash but *had* understood that segwith had been enabled. Clea= rly my mistake. Regards, Damian Williamson ________________________________ From: CANNON Sent: Tuesday, 6 February 2018 1:08:24 PM To: Damian Williamson; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] NIST 8202 Blockchain Technology Overview -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 01/31/2018 11:16 AM, Damian Williamson wrote: > I disagree with the correctness of the following statement: > > >> Rather than implementing the SegWit changes, the developers of Bitcoin C= ash decided to simply increase the blocksize. > > > I would suggest "Rather than being satisfied with the implementation of S= egWit changes alone, the developers of > Bitcoin Cash decided to also increase the blocksize. > > > Regards, > > Damian Williamson You do realize that segwit includes many improvements of which are unrelate= d to scaling? These same improvements of which simply increasing the blocksize alone would not fix or enable. Segwit is no= t just a blocksize increase. Bitcoin Cash, while increasing the blocksize directly, from my understandin= g has yet to implement the improvements and capabilities that segwit enables. One example being, with transactions hashes being able to be calculated in = advanced prior to signing (due to the signature being in different section than that used to calculate the transaction ID) it is possible to create transaction trees= , enhanced smart contracts, trustless mixing protocols, micropayment networks, etc... Segwit also increases the security of signatures. There are lots of other things segregated witness enables as well. By saying "..segwit changes alone.... decided to also..." Bitcoin Cash has = not implemented segwit. Bitcoin Cash only increased the blocksize. that wording above at least from the way I read it, seems to imply that Bit= coin Cash has segwit. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJaeQ3IAAoJEAYDai9lH2mwKkQP/3dgYApq1qv2lGIyZIdeN9SE D5AuXPqFQYAoMwhC0RPNQU/jUisKIyd6zm4XCIm6KPufCtXkjfH9FLhd0ThbCTcy Gk+pYYRBzSuBZdPBKg0DHu7alRETtxbdtUI0zDfERt1FFZb+HmcDcGTfwdVci3fa jBiFXq1R+myMW5xdB44dipSk5kBhcpx2zitr1bIA4rF11QbxKAmzU7iPdRpA+PXz gB9NImc1Dbz+TEA50tdq3v9Ov3x7m7F+QtBnqyLAigJh6XKa6guCfwKIGoawRGwZ v2ur7T+Qh3KGRXCBlHnxgtFte16wHagwvsVgE5EEmJR0yJUc/4XU2kCGANVNDZ/P pphqk8pruQ5rjQ8S+s6i5XG8oHVSB2fDh56NvPY7msA72j+Gk+XneV2eJbEAdjhb 9Ci7u1uPJL3pb3c/ZOwQvpIRV3tRjlh0DertWkd3Li5RZLO3uFvBTxNxrni6+9bf /cmAOwfHjoUp8BX/nvgMjpIDCoEu+Rv9IO/ok3s3mX300JbczAdGbXbsPTE5G+DI RB1kSmszwst8wOlOAsdVqk/iKRJdN9daTGGN6aE/wjkpSg8rW9BOaoI2X9t4oXCU +oe/WlgkxhxPcNyhKpLeeYVe6nFX2fjU+THyyiAq/LJ/qHU/brKpXc4NesCVHhQP BBlxiN0E4gndMGs/Lx89 =3D+UCK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --_000_PS2P216MB0179C3CDAB11D24B7BE6880C9DFD0PS2P216MB0179KORP_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Then you have my apology, I will = not claim to be any kind of advocate or user of Bitcoin Cash but *had* unde= rstood that segwith had been enabled. Clearly my mistake.


Regards,

Damian Williamson

From: CANNON <cannon@can= non-ciota.info>
Sent: Tuesday, 6 February 2018 1:08:24 PM
To: Damian Williamson; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] NIST 8202 Blockchain Technology Overview<= /font>
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 01/31/2018 11:16 AM, Damian Williamson wrote:
> I disagree with the correctness of the following statement:
>
>
>> Rather than implementing the SegWit changes, the developers of Bit= coin Cash decided to simply increase the blocksize.
>
>
> I would suggest "Rather than being satisfied with the implementat= ion of SegWit changes alone, the developers of
> Bitcoin Cash decided to also increase the blocksize.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Damian Williamson

You do realize that segwit includes many improvements of which are unrelate= d to scaling? These same improvements of which
simply increasing the blocksize alone would not fix or enable. Segwit is no= t just a blocksize increase.
Bitcoin Cash, while increasing the blocksize directly, from my understandin= g has yet to implement the
improvements and capabilities that segwit enables.

One example being, with transactions hashes being able to be calculated in = advanced prior to signing
(due to the signature being in different section than that used
to calculate the transaction ID) it is possible to create transaction trees= , enhanced smart contracts, trustless mixing protocols,
micropayment networks, etc...

Segwit also increases the security of signatures.

There are lots of other things segregated witness enables as well.

By saying "..segwit changes alone.... decided to also..." Bitcoin= Cash has not implemented segwit. Bitcoin Cash only
increased the blocksize.

that wording above at least from the way I read it, seems to imply that Bit= coin Cash has segwit.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJaeQ3IAAoJEAYDai9lH2mwKkQP/3dgYApq1qv2lGIyZIdeN9SE
D5AuXPqFQYAoMwhC0RPNQU/jUisKIyd6zm4XCIm6KPufCtXkjfH9FLhd0ThbCTcy
Gk+pYYRBzSuBZdPBKg0DHu7alRETtxbdtUI0zDfERt1FFZb+HmcDcGTfwdVci3fa jBiFXq1R+myMW5xdB44dipSk5kBhcpx2zitr1bIA4rF11QbxKAmzU7iPdRpA+PXz gB9NImc1Dbz+TEA50tdq3v9Ov3x7m7F+QtBnqyLAigJh6XKa6guCfwKIGoawRGwZ v2ur7T+Qh3KGRXCBlHnxgtFte16wHagwvsVgE5EEmJR0yJUc/4XU2kCGANVNDZ/P
pphqk8pruQ5rjQ8S+s6i5XG8oHVSB2fDh56NvPY7msA72j+Gk+XneV2eJbEAdjh= b
9Ci7u1uPJL3pb3c/ZOwQvpIRV3tRjlh0DertWkd3Li5RZLO3uFvBTxNxrni6+9bf
/cmAOwfHjoUp8BX/nvgMjpIDCoEu+Rv9IO/ok3s3mX300JbczAdGbXbsPTE5G+DI RB1kSmszwst8wOlOAsdVqk/iKRJdN9daTGGN6aE/wjkpSg8rW9BOaoI2X9t4oXCU
+oe/WlgkxhxPcNyhKpLeeYVe6nFX2fjU+THyyiAq/LJ/qHU/brKpXc4NesCVHhQP BBlxiN0E4gndMGs/Lx89
=3D+UCK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--_000_PS2P216MB0179C3CDAB11D24B7BE6880C9DFD0PS2P216MB0179KORP_--