Author: Adam Back 2017-06-28 05:28:31
Published on: 2017-06-28T05:28:31+00:00
On June 27th, 2017, a discussion took place on the Bitcoin-dev forum between Luke Dashjr and Chris Stewart regarding the BRIBEVERIFY opcode. According to Chris Stewart, the opcode is used to redefine the NOP4 opcode. When executed, the script will only evaluate to "true" if the critical hash is included at the vout index in the coinbase transaction. He further stated that this would allow sidechains to be merged mined against Bitcoin without putting extra resource requirements on Bitcoin miners. However, Luke Dashjr argued that this outcome would lead to "whoever pays the most gets the next sidechain block" which is not useful for merge mining.The purpose of "blind merge mining" was explained by Chris Stewart as being that the sidechain fees are paid in main chain bitcoin instead of sidechain bitcoin. This means that a miner who solo mines the main chain could still mine the sidechain by requesting a block-proposal from a trusted sidechain fullnode. The sidechain fullnode would actually pay the mainchain fee and pay itself the sidechain fees as part of the side-chain block-proposal. This approach was seen as less centralized than forcing miners to directly process sidechain blocks, which could potentially be expensive in terms of bandwidth and CPU usage. Overall, this discussion provides insight into the different approaches being considered for sidechain development and the potential benefits and drawbacks of each approach.
Updated on: 2023-06-12T02:57:44.271248+00:00