Published on: 2015-12-21T03:34:06+00:00
In a series of discussions on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, various proposals were made to address the handling of dormant unspent transaction outputs (UTXOs) in the Bitcoin network. One proposal suggested adding a consensus-critical maximum UTXO age to the protocol, where UTXOs older than that age could be dropped from the cache but would require proof to spend. Another proposal focused on creating different types of full nodes, including lite UTXO nodes that would only store UTXOs created in the past 420,000 blocks.There were concerns raised about the reversal of the useful minimization attribute of hierarchical deterministic wallets and the status of "grandfathered" UTXOs generated in 2009. It was argued that generating proofs of past transactions could help preserve the "just backup the seed" functionality. However, there were also concerns about the size of membership proofs and the trade-off between bandwidth and storage.Another proposal suggested committing to a hash for all UTXOs generated in a block after 420,000 confirmations. These UTXOs could then be permanently deleted from nodes' records. To redeem a dormant UTXO, users would need to provide additional information such as the scriptPubKey, height, UTXO value, and Merkle path to the dormant UTXO commitment.The discussions also touched on the behavior and cost of the proposed solutions, the role of archive nodes in providing UTXO data, and the challenges of including UTXO data in paper wallets. It was noted that while these proposals aimed to make the system more efficient and avoid storage problems for full nodes, there might be other more efficient proposals with similar goals.Overall, the discussions highlighted the importance of finding a balance between efficiency, security, and user experience in handling dormant UTXOs in the Bitcoin network. The proposals put forth various ideas and considerations to address this issue.In an email conversation between Chris Priest and an unknown recipient, the possibility of sweeping a paper wallet created in 2013 was discussed. The recipient explained that if one has a paper wallet with only a private key, they would need to contact a public index or synchronize the full blockchain history to find out which coins have been assigned to it and their TXids. Running a full node would eliminate the need for synchronization and make one their own archive. However, none of these cases result in a loss of data.The proposed scheme to limit the UTXO set in Bitcoin has faced criticism from some developers. This scheme would require users to contact an "archive node" before making a transaction to obtain the UTXO data, making it more difficult for people to use Bitcoin. Supporters argue that limiting the UTXO size is necessary due to the number of users on the network, but critics point out that the membership proofs required for transactions could become too large. There are differing opinions on whether this scheme would improve or worsen Bitcoin.A thread on the Bitcoin-dev mailing list raised concerns about users losing their unspent transaction outputs (UTXO) due to a change in the Bitcoin protocol. The post clarified that UTXOs would still be spendable but would require a membership proof. Users wouldn't need to store the data themselves as they could obtain it from archive nodes. Another proposal by Peter Todd suggested "STXO commitments," but there are concerns about the potential size of membership proofs. It was suggested that participants in the mailing list should avoid reflexive opposition to moderately complex ideas they don't understand to maintain the utility of the list.The idea of deleting dormant UTXOs in Bitcoin has been discussed to prevent people from forgetting about their mined bitcoins. One suggestion is to set a higher threshold for deletion, such as 80-120 years, to ensure that bitcoins are not lost forever. Alternatively, some propose that dormant UTXOs should re-enter the economy as miner fees, with one dormant UTXO mined per block. This would require a hard fork but could fund cheap transactions indefinitely and incentivize miners to hold copies of dormant UTXOs.In 2015, a proposal was made for archived UTXOs, with retrieval costs borne by the UTXO holder instead of the entire storage network. The proposal suggested that dormant UTXOs be those with 420,000 confirmations, after which they would commit to a hash for all UTXOs generated in the block X-420,000.A proposal has been made to handle dormant UTXOs in Bitcoin. UTXOs with 420,000 confirmations would be considered dormant. In each block after 420,000, a hash would be committed to for all UTXOs generated in block X-420,000. After some confirmations, nodes could safely delete the UTXO records of block X permanently.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T17:08:49.139806+00:00