Author: Peter Todd 2015-12-31 23:48:48
Published on: 2015-12-31T23:48:48+00:00
In an IRC discussion, there was a debate about what should be required from the current block to calculate the previous block possession proof. The requirement of coinbase outputs restricts some mining setups while requiring a commitment to the current block's transaction outputs restricts tx selection outsourcing schemes. It was suggested that the nonce can be picked arbitrarily and if it is arbitrary then a future soft-fork can add commitments to the current block contents. Thus, the previous block proof can be simple H( + ). Fraud proofs in relation to previous block content proofs were also brought up by Pieter Wuille. If the possession proof is structured as a merkle tree then fraud can be easily proven with a merkle path. Fraud proofs would be a proof that some data is fraudulent or an unmet challenge that some data is correct. If the posession proof is structured as a merkle tree, then fraud can be easily proven with a merkle path. In that model, they'd take the previous block contents and rehash it in its entirety with the nonce.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T02:43:56.057469+00:00