1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
|
Return-Path: <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00CFB12D2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 18 Sep 2015 06:43:04 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f176.google.com (mail-wi0-f176.google.com
[209.85.212.176])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 596DFE1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 18 Sep 2015 06:43:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wiclk2 with SMTP id lk2so17904773wic.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 17 Sep 2015 23:43:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=MB3qpLJN7hHflC7BQfGxJsuJIN8cVQktpF2o7wWzPtE=;
b=XJDD+SyTrjYrY3KkzNC+TCw+HyrVOde1jWJgOjdnJ3ggsuJbYp5AbpXbnAtPt2iA9y
Mb8APRJWTyL6t0ve+3JG07fUoLmYOoNd7gERyL1HhUna/TCMLKptUnyZpcrXP6Qt8c3R
z3ta8tX706P+lKLuTEqrcROmAip9FyEDnG3n4bwwVSGWlKh+7ERDN3XFOChyRe4nVN9l
YVcV2Oa9I1mEd35D2WzgfNC3YD/0I2wyFEEBwFbpx4b0uzoRXXHZSnfoc1xavdKsqD2U
8XvC9UbPks94/XVK3VRewZT2YUFz5Y5ExxAmSGKolhU6DVghM6waiO3kHc6IjBreA7oT
MuWw==
X-Received: by 10.194.191.164 with SMTP id gz4mr4927901wjc.21.1442558581818;
Thu, 17 Sep 2015 23:43:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.28.21.200 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Sep 2015 23:42:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <014345a983eabf243d9ce127de0dff7c@xbt.hk>
References: <a50b82c156c805a284386d80a42cc926@xbt.hk>
<CAOG=w-vGqsAcw5vdY8SaGVe4Q6XX1J=GCsZftWgjES_N_5c2pA@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDp_afyqskEV8QmO43=-6R_2OJm36GVQxcQO_3ao2jC1gw@mail.gmail.com>
<C9A1D16E-03F7-4860-8E9B-32A98E06CE49@petertodd.org>
<014345a983eabf243d9ce127de0dff7c@xbt.hk>
From: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 07:42:42 +0100
Message-ID: <CADJgMzupLGVKfHnkAwJYUeAe-XHKtc0o7d8G3-2N1Ls5orfS=Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: jl2012@xbt.hk
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7ba98212d64b66051fffd757
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM,
HK_RANDOM_FROM,
HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no 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] Fill-or-kill transaction
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: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 06:43:04 -0000
--047d7ba98212d64b66051fffd757
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 4:27 AM, jl2012 via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Btc Drak =E6=96=BC 2015-09-17 15:12 =E5=AF=AB=E5=88=B0:
>
>> Forgive me if I have missed the exact use-case, but this seems overly
>> complex. Surely fill-or-kill refers to getting a transaction confirmed
>> within a few confirms or to drop the tx from the mempool so it wont be
>> considered for inclusion anymore. As such, you could just repurpose a
>> small range of nLocktime such that a TX will be accepted into mempool
>> for a specific period before expiring.
>>
>
> What I'm describing is to implement fill-or-kill as consensus rule.
> Certainly, we could implement it at the P2P network level: everything is
> the same as I described, but the nLockTime2 and nKillTime are for referen=
ce
> only and tx validity depends only on the nLockTime. Benevolent miners
> should drop the tx after the suggested kill time but there is no guarante=
e
>
Sure, you can make the scheme I describe consensus based by adding the rule
tx is not valid to mine after expiry: this still keeps the simplicity I
described.
--047d7ba98212d64b66051fffd757
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On F=
ri, Sep 18, 2015 at 4:27 AM, jl2012 via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<=
a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">b=
itcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote c=
lass=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;=
padding-left:1ex">Btc Drak =E6=96=BC 2015-09-17 15:12 =E5=AF=AB=E5=88=B0:<s=
pan class=3D""><br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Forgive me if I have missed the exact use-case, but this seems overly<br>
complex. Surely fill-or-kill refers to getting a transaction confirmed<br>
within a few confirms or to drop the tx from the mempool so it wont be<br>
considered for inclusion anymore. As such, you could just repurpose a<br>
small range of nLocktime such that a TX will be accepted into mempool<br>
for a specific period before expiring.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
What I'm describing is to implement fill-or-kill as consensus rule. Cer=
tainly, we could implement it at the P2P network level: everything is the s=
ame as I described, but the nLockTime2 and nKillTime are for reference only=
and tx validity depends only on the nLockTime. Benevolent miners should dr=
op the tx after the suggested kill time but there is no guarantee<br></bloc=
kquote><div><br></div><div>Sure, you can make the scheme I describe consens=
us based by adding the rule tx is not valid to mine after expiry: this stil=
l keeps the simplicity I described.</div></div></div></div>
--047d7ba98212d64b66051fffd757--
|
