Author: Jeremy 2014-07-17 19:55:10
Published on: 2014-07-17T19:55:10+00:00
The discussion revolves around the costs associated with implementing a new transaction type in Bitcoin's network. The proposed method is compared to P2SH, which is already analyzed by developers, rolled out and working. The cost of updating everybody to relay this new transaction type is also considered. The cost of increasing the rate of UTXO growth versus P2SH, and "default public" versus P2SH's "default private" are discussed as well.In terms of space efficiency, publishing the script in the txout has the advantage of being easily audited by third parties scanning the blockchain, but it may be accomplished by offering the script upon request out-of-band. An interesting idea is presented of creating a "cookbook" of useful scripts like those described in the discussion.The proposal suggests doing a p2sh with a switch statement that lets you select one of n scripts each 520 bytes long without bloating the utxo pool more than a p2sh, the cost being purely on disk. This could represent a space savings on disk longterm for regular p2sh. Adding some kind of "function-hash-pointer jump table / switch statement" could be pretty cool in terms of space savings as well as allowing for more complicated scripts to be built.There is an implication in terms of increased utxo pool bloat, but also an implication in terms of increased txn complexity (each 20 byte hash allows for a 500 byte script, only one of the 500 byte scripts has to be permanently stored on blockchain). When considering these costs, using a normal P2SH output + a script with OP_IF and friends seems more straightforward. Doing boolean logic with multisig groups is quite possible.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T01:02:58.836081+00:00