Re: [Bitcoin-development] Relative CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY (was CLTV proposal)

2015-05-05 Thread Tier Nolan
I think that should be greater than in the comparison? You want it to fail if the the height of the UTXO plus the sequence number is greater than the spending block's height. There should be an exception for final inputs. Otherwise, they will count as relative locktime of 0x. Is this ch

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Relative CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY (was CLTV proposal)

2015-05-05 Thread Jorge Timón
Well, apparently the timestamp can be make compatible with Mark's nSequence-based RCLTV by adding an additional check at the block level but I was only explaining the concept using heights (which is the most interesting part IMO). I'm also not sure I understood the details and I don't want to confu