On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Michael Gronager <grona...@mac.com> wrote: > Twisting your words a bit I read: > > * you want to support relay of transactions that can be changed on the fly, > but you consider it wrong to modify them. > * #3 is already not forwarded, but you still find it relevant to support it. > > Rational use cases of #3 will be pretty hard to find given the fact that they > can be changed on the fly. We are down to inclusion in blocks by miners for > special purposes - or did I miss out something?
You did. See the other sighash flags. > I think that we could guarantee fewer incidents by making version 1 > transactions unmalleable and then optionally introduce a version 3 that > supported the malleability feature. That way most existing problematic > implementations would be fixed and no doors were closed for people > experimenting with other stuff - tx v 3 would probably then be called > experimental transactions. In exchange you make the behavior basically impossible do deploy without first blocking all ongoing transactions. This seems foolish. All signers need to be updated to change their behavior to be anti-malleability compatible, they can change their version at the same time... and leave things actually working for the things which can't be easily updated. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Managing the Performance of Cloud-Based Applications Take advantage of what the Cloud has to offer - Avoid Common Pitfalls. Read the Whitepaper. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=121054471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
