BIP-119 UASF

Summary:

In an email addressed to Bitcoin Developers, the sender provides a note stating that the content of the email is inspired by a post written by Chris Belcher. The email includes various links and proposals related to covenants in the Bitcoin ecosystem. One of the links provided compares all covenant proposals in a Google spreadsheet.The email also discusses the controversy surrounding general and recursive covenants, providing a link to another post that explains why they are controversial. The sender expresses a preference for CTV (CheckTemplateVerify) over APO (AnyPrevOut). They argue that LN (Lightning Network) symmetry can be achieved with CSFS (Channel Stateful Funding Setup) later if there is a demand beyond what is expressed on Twitter. They also highlight the improvements that CTV brings to the Lightning Network and emphasize that it does not change how sighash works, yet still allows for the implementation of covenants. Additionally, they mention that CTV offers benefits such as reducing the number of bytes and providing more tooling. Unlike recursive covenants, CTV is not limited to taproot.The email briefly touches on MASF (Miner Activated Soft Fork) or speedy trial, stating that it allows miners to coordinate and signal "readiness." However, the sender clarifies that this is often misunderstood by users, as miners can still refuse to follow new consensus rules even after signaling. They propose an alternative approach called UASF (User Activated Soft Fork), which ensures that economic nodes enforce consensus rules. The sender suggests that if there is positive feedback, a UASF client can be developed for activation, with Bitcoin Core following suit.In conclusion, the email provides information on covenant proposals, discusses the controversy surrounding general and recursive covenants, and expresses a preference for CTV. It also introduces the concept of UASF as an alternative to MASF or speedy trial for enforcing consensus rules.

Updated on: 2023-08-21T01:53:34.868070+00:00