I disagree with a bunch of your points, but I'll wait on others to comment,
except I will say that I don't understand what the 20 byte keyhash is. Can
you elucidate?
I am assuming major mining folks have written their own coinbasing
facilities, but perhaps this is not the case -- if so, I agree that some
work is necessary for such miners.
Finally I will just comment that I am guided by the general perspective
that many things about bitcoins are opt-in; therefore it makes sense to me
put difficult work onto those who are motivated to do it, and keep things
as easy as possible for the 'maybes' to participate -- hence small
courtesies like allowing text/plain or text/html.
Peter
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Luke-Jr <l...@dashjr.org> wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 29, 2012 3:05:18 PM Peter Vessenes wrote:
> > 1) Germane to the original conversation, anything hard to implement will
> > not get implemented by miners.
>
> Without my got-tired-of-waiting-for-someone-to-merge-it coinbaser branch,
> anything modifying the coinbase is hard to implement.
>
> > 2) Coinbase is hard-limited to 100 bytes; this has to include space for
> > voting as well as extra nonce, etc. So, I'm not sure that a full URL is a
> > good plan.
>
> Rather, I would suggest a 20 byte keyhash, which allows the owner to
> broadcast
> a full URI out-of-band.
>
> > 1) They shall prepend \mi: to the url to designate it as a url for miner
> > info, and append a trailing \ to the url
>
> How about a simple prefix to the fixed-size keyhash?
> Perhaps "MFR=" (Mining Fee Rules)
>
> > 2) The url given in the coinbase shall have http:// prepended to it
> before
> > processing.
>
> I would recommend miners use https, with a specified SSL keyhash in the URI
> (so we don't need to pay for a "proper" SSL cert).
>
> > 3) The destination may be a redirect (to allow short URLs), or may
> deliver
> > content
>
> Clients should simply be required to follow the relevant HTTP
> specification.
>
> > 4) The content-type returned by the final site post-redirect shall be
> > either (preferred text/json) or text/plain or text/html
>
> text/plain and text/html are just wrong and don't make any sense here.
>
> > Inre: Luke's complaint about JSON, it is the language of the web. There
> is
> > no easier format for both computers and humans to read, and in this case,
> > it includes extensibility, which is nice, since we have no idea how
> miners
> > will wish to divvy up their services; I think one would need to make a
> > strong case against JSON for a specific reason to not choose it by
> default.
>
> Bitcoin isn't "the web", it's a complicated script-based cryptocurrency.
> Everything in the Bitcoin protocol requires a computer's interpretation for
> humans, and there's no reason to stray from this default. Also, JSON is not
> extensible in any of the ways needed for this specific purpose.
>
> > 4) The text of the document delivered shall be a JSON format dictionary,
> > and shall include at minimum the following fields: 'min_fee',
> 'pool_name',
> > and 'last_modified' Optional fields can be determined over time as
> > necessary by the mining community
>
> Last Modified and other caching rules are dealt with in the relevant HTTP
> specification...
>
> > 5) The Service Level Agreement isn't binding, but miners who implement it
> > are expected to make a best efforts attempt to follow it.
>
> While it doesn't make sense to give it the full legal force of a contract,
> I
> think it should be expressed as a "MUST" in the BIP.
>
> > Generally a miner would occasionally publish the \mi:\ when they had
> > updated their SLA, or just every so often, but the canonical location
> would
> > be the final destination URL from the redirects.
>
> The coinbase advertisement MUST be part of every coinbase mined by the
> miner,
> or there's no reliable way to prove which blocks are theirs.
>
--
Peter J. Vessenes
CEO, CoinLab
M: 206.595.9839
Skype: vessenes
Google+ <https://plus.google.com/112885659993091300749>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
