Jeff Garzik [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2014-02-12 📝 Original message:On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at ...
📅 Original date posted:2014-02-12
📝 Original message:On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Rune Kjær Svendsen
<runesvend at gmail.com> wrote:
> Instead of trying to remove the possibility of transaction
> malleability, would it make sense to define a new, "canonical
> transaction hash/ID" (cTxID),
Yes, that is one proposal: https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commits/normtxid
But it is not a complete solution for all transaction types.
--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
📝 Original message:On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Rune Kjær Svendsen
<runesvend at gmail.com> wrote:
> Instead of trying to remove the possibility of transaction
> malleability, would it make sense to define a new, "canonical
> transaction hash/ID" (cTxID),
Yes, that is one proposal: https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commits/normtxid
But it is not a complete solution for all transaction types.
--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/