Author: Peter Todd 2014-08-06 17:20:25
Published on: 2014-08-06T17:20:25+00:00
In this context, Mark Friedenbach is questioning the efficiency of adding an nExpiry field to the transaction format. He suggests that if it's a consensus rule, then it needs to be included with the transaction as part of the network and on-disk data structures for proper validation. However, this would be both more disruptive and less efficient. On the other hand, changing a data format is certainly not feasible because it's incompatible with standard Bitcoin data structures. Furthermore, Friedenbach notes that we need fundamental improvements in efficiency instead of little micro-optimizations everywhere. Regarding validation, he suggests that the merkle radix tree can meet that need by allowing the absence of data to be proven. If the field is pre-consensus, it has no business in the transaction structure and should be packaged in some sort of envelope container. In conclusion, Friedenbach argues that the nExpiry field is rather useless without consensus. Expiry is only useful if it is a guarantee; otherwise, one might as well just implement tx replacement directly. The message ends with a cryptographic signature.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T01:46:20.473696+00:00