Published on: 2017-01-28T00:35:55+00:00
The email discusses the controversial idea of an extension block, which would allow for more block space through a soft fork. The extension block proposal is seen as coercive because it allows transactions to occur in data that those who choose not to enforce the soft fork's rules have decided to ignore. This makes it difficult to track transaction history and identify risks based on potential censorship-enforced transactions. It also forces the entire network to trust the extension block instead of opting into a soft fork's security.The email argues that this sets a dangerous precedent, as miners may start soft-forking in sidechains, posing a significant risk. Additionally, there is a social cost associated with implementing an extension block. On a different note, the proposal describes a method for sending bitcoins from the main UTXO to an xUTXO, where people can trade inside the xblock just like in the main block.The integration of UTXO and transaction is explained in detail, including special bridging witness programs for returning transactions and fees collection in the xblock. However, sending money back from the xblock to the main block requires 100-block maturity for the returning UTXO, significantly changing the user experience.The proposal raises questions about simplifying the design without compromising security, eliminating the 100-block maturity requirement, and reducing the maturity time. To ensure that the recipient won't be paid with a returning transaction unless explicitly requested, the direction flag is suggested, which may be combined with the serialized witness version to save one byte.Overall, the proposal is presented for discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list. It aims to implement extra block space through a soft fork while maintaining existing security assumptions and being transparent to existing wallets. However, new wallets taking advantage of the extra block space will have a different user experience. The proposal defines terminology such as main block/tx/UTXO, extension transaction/block/UTXO, bridging witness program, integrating UTXO/transaction, returning transaction, fees collection in xblock, and xblock commitment.The proposal also acknowledges the challenge of sending money from the side chain to the main chain, but presents solutions to overcome this challenge. It raises questions about simplifying the design, eliminating the 100-block maturity requirement, and reducing the 100-block overkill.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T19:26:58.898298+00:00