Author: jl2012 at xbt.hk 2015-08-24 07:00:37
Published on: 2015-08-24T07:00:37+00:00
In a message to the Bitcoin development mailing list, Mark Friedenbach raises concerns about the proposal to use the nVersion field in Bitcoin transactions to indicate whether or not BIP 68 is active. Friedenbach suggests that burning a version bit for this purpose would be a waste of resources and that there is no compelling reason to make BIP 68 optional in this way. He notes that BIP 68 semantics are already optional by toggling the most significant bit without permanently burning a version bit. In response, a user named Pieter Wuille explains that there is a trade-off between using the nSequence and nVersion fields to indicate the meaning of the nSequence field. Wuille argues that while burning a version bit for this purpose may be costly, it could allow for more flexibility in redefining the nSequence field.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T19:21:03.855164+00:00