Hi Defenwycke, I think this is not a horrible idea, there might be future demand for a pruneable proof of publication space.
But, your proposal does not provide an incentive for anyone to adopt it. If it was cheaper than witness space, I think it would be a serious consideration especially for rollups. The idea that the bytes incur full cost (4WU) makes it on arrival economically speaking. Also it's a bit unclear how consensus and nodes in sync would interact with the "recent window". It's a reasonable approach to mandate the presence of such an extension block near the chain-tip, but nodes by default should not download or verify it during IBD. This would only add a constant burden to nodes, while allowing bitcoin to scale on higher layers more that require such proof of publication mechanism for their security. Thinking that this would be used by graffiti type payloads that especially are seeking the permanence, persistence and replication of bitcoin transactional data, or that metaprotocols that want to use the block space as an archival layer for their own token ledgers is I'm afraid completely misguided or even delusional. BR, moonsettler -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/3S1IMGSH6z-3Ho81Ugp9o-ltTwpIC-4ow6bn6aEAtK4XrkG5HTkvTw0BeZFpPILfabdp7rz_LDHEBWX_XZk0a7nKR4sJRUp_3B7pAMaJ86I%3D%40protonmail.com.
