jl2012 at xbt.hk [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2015-08-27 📝 Original message:Rusty Russell 於 ...
📅 Original date posted:2015-08-27
📝 Original message:Rusty Russell 於 2015-08-26 23:08 寫到:
> - We should immediately deploy an IsStandard() rule which insists that
> nSequence is 0xFFFFFFFF or 0, so nobody screws themselves when we
> soft fork and they had random junk in there.
This is not needed because BIP68 is not active for version 1 tx. No
existing wallet would be affected.
>
> Aside: I'd also like to have nLockTime apply even if nSequence !=
> 0xFFFFFFFF (another mistake I made). So I'd like an IsStandard() rule
> to say it nLockTime be 0 if an nSequence != 0xFFFFFFFF. Would that
> screw anyone currently?
Do you mean "have nLockTime apply even if nSequence = 0xFFFFFFFF"? This
is a softfork. Should we do this together with BIP65, BIP68 and BIP112?
> Thanks,
> Rusty.
📝 Original message:Rusty Russell 於 2015-08-26 23:08 寫到:
> - We should immediately deploy an IsStandard() rule which insists that
> nSequence is 0xFFFFFFFF or 0, so nobody screws themselves when we
> soft fork and they had random junk in there.
This is not needed because BIP68 is not active for version 1 tx. No
existing wallet would be affected.
>
> Aside: I'd also like to have nLockTime apply even if nSequence !=
> 0xFFFFFFFF (another mistake I made). So I'd like an IsStandard() rule
> to say it nLockTime be 0 if an nSequence != 0xFFFFFFFF. Would that
> screw anyone currently?
Do you mean "have nLockTime apply even if nSequence = 0xFFFFFFFF"? This
is a softfork. Should we do this together with BIP65, BIP68 and BIP112?
> Thanks,
> Rusty.