So I think the question to ask would be "why can't we just make sure it's not 64?"
On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 11:24 AM Greg Sanders <gsander...@gmail.com> wrote: > AFAIU the number was picked to protect against CVE-2017-12842 covertly. > See: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16885 > <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16885/files> which updated the > text to explicitly mention this fact. > > On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 11:20 AM Thomas Voegtlin via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Hello list, >> >> I have been trying to CPFP a transaction using OP_RETURN, because the >> remaining output value would have been lower than the dust threshold. >> >> The scriptPubkey of the output was OP_RETURN + OP_0, and there was a >> single p2wsh input. >> >> The result is a 60 bytes transaction (without witness), that gets >> rejected because it is lower than MIN_STANDARD_TX_NONWITNESS_SIZE, which >> is equal to 82 bytes. >> >> Why is that value so high? Would it make sense to lower it to 60? >> >> >> Thomas >> _______________________________________________ >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >> >
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
