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
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <morcos@gmail.com>) id 1YIeUn-0000kl-0K
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 14:30:29 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.212.177 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.212.177; envelope-from=morcos@gmail.com;
helo=mail-wi0-f177.google.com;
Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com ([209.85.212.177])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YIeUl-0007bV-Sy
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 14:30:29 +0000
Received: by mail-wi0-f177.google.com with SMTP id r20so22178632wiv.4
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 06:30:21 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.79.226 with SMTP id m2mr54121506wjx.60.1422973821762;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 06:30:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.180.207.9 with HTTP; Tue, 3 Feb 2015 06:30:21 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJDcyEqAm4bwCJsgDQiT14kZiLzmwOgLn-oC_SHZTg7sew@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPg+sBhk7F2OHT64i2LNSjv8DR5tD3RJkLJGzPGZW8OPQTCjQw@mail.gmail.com>
<87egqnwt7g.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
<CAPg+sBjQAi_hCcoV0gecVQAd4PYKzRd5F_nymz8UVt9BFg8O2Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgQjTq1M6fF5KDiZ-qBrCWjs9z5VKtj-c1ghRfDeK6iyPA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBjjYLf4NZ8ezK7ML_OO-e6C8_V1i12AXejjrgp+wFB-pg@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+s+GJDcyEqAm4bwCJsgDQiT14kZiLzmwOgLn-oC_SHZTg7sew@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 09:30:21 -0500
Message-ID: <CAPWm=eXq0EXeUz+bPivZTp+UO65r1XoYVemXcXBdSEE51khvtg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alex Morcos <morcos@gmail.com>
To: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bf0c5382bc4a1050e2fe9b3
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(morcos[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1YIeUl-0007bV-Sy
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [softfork proposal] Strict DER signatures
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: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 14:30:29 -0000
--047d7bf0c5382bc4a1050e2fe9b3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Could we see a PR that adds it to BIP 66? Perhaps we'd all agree quickly
that its so simple we can just add it...
In either case it doesn't seem strictly necessary to me that it was
non-standard before it becomes a soft-fork...
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com> wrote:
> > One way to do that is to just - right now - add a patch to 0.10 to
> > make those non-standard. This requires another validation flag, with a
> > bunch of switching logic.
> >
> > The much simpler alternative is just adding this to BIP66's DERSIG
> > right now, which is a one-line change that's obviously softforking. Is
> > anyone opposed to doing so at this stage?
>
> Not opposed, but is kind of late for 0.10, I had hoped to tag rc4 today.
>
> Wladimir
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website,
> sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
> your
> hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
> leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
> look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
--047d7bf0c5382bc4a1050e2fe9b3
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Could we see a PR that adds it to BIP 66? =C2=A0 Perhaps w=
e'd all agree quickly that its so simple we can just add it...<div>In e=
ither case it doesn't seem strictly necessary to me that it was non-sta=
ndard before it becomes a soft-fork...</div><div><br></div></div><div class=
=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:00=
AM, Wladimir <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:laanwj@gmail.com" tar=
get=3D"_blank">laanwj@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padd=
ing-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">> One way to do that is to just - right n=
ow - add a patch to 0.10 to<br>
> make those non-standard. This requires another validation flag, with a=
<br>
> bunch of switching logic.<br>
><br>
> The much simpler alternative is just adding this to BIP66's DERSIG=
<br>
> right now, which is a one-line change that's obviously softforking=
. Is<br>
> anyone opposed to doing so at this stage?<br>
<br>
</span>Not opposed, but is kind of late for 0.10, I had hoped to tag rc4 to=
day.<br>
<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><br>
Wladimir<br>
</font></span><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5"><br>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---<br>
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website,<br>
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is you=
r<br>
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought<br>
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a<=
br>
look and join the conversation now. <a href=3D"http://goparallel.sourceforg=
e.net/" target=3D"_blank">http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Bitcoin-development mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin-develo=
pment@lists.sourceforge.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development=
" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de=
velopment</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
--047d7bf0c5382bc4a1050e2fe9b3--
|
