Published on: 2018-09-07T13:47:17+00:00
Alejandro Ranchal Pedrosa has proposed studying the possibility of canceling Bitcoin transactions from the user's point of view. He suggests a model for user-agents and quantifies the potential satisfaction that users can obtain. Brandon Smith responds to the proposal, highlighting the need to ensure that existing wallets and users are not vulnerable to scams or delays in transaction processing. He suggests alternative approaches such as Lightning, improved fee estimation, and improved mempool eviction/re-propagation resistance.Another proposal by Alejandro Ranchal Pedrosa suggests enhancing OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY to allow outputs that are spendable by different parties at different times. Brandon Smith raises concerns about the complexity of implementing such a solution and the potential vulnerabilities it may introduce. He emphasizes the importance of protecting existing wallets and users from malicious actors.The discussion also involves the extension of OP_CSV and/or OP_CLTV to allow and interpret negative values, which would enable time-based invalidation of transactions. Matt Corallo proposes a multisig option with a locktime pre-signed transaction as an alternative approach. The proposal is still under discussion, and a BIP is being prepared.Gregory Maxwell responds to a proposal for non-monotone validity events in Bitcoin transactions, explaining that such functionality has been deemed harmful in the past due to the potential destruction of coins without dishonest actions. He argues that there is no compelling use case for non-monotone validity events once the negative effects are addressed.The email exchange includes references to previous discussions on similar topics and links to papers discussing the proposals. The authors are seeking feedback and discussion before formally proposing the BIPs.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T23:53:30.514715+00:00