Jan Møller [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2014-04-23 📝 Original message:>Of course, this is an ...
📅 Original date posted:2014-04-23
📝 Original message:>Of course, this is an especially difficult case, as you must send the
>double-spend after the original transaction - normally just sending a
>non-standard tx to Eligius first would suffice. Note how this defeats
>Andresen's double-spend-relay patch(3) as proposed since the
>double-spend is a non-standard transaction.
Why can't you send a non-standard tx to Eligius first in this scenario?
Is it because LuckyBit is connected directly to Eligius, and does Eligius
relay (not only mine) non-standard transactions?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140423/169b24c1/attachment.html>;
📝 Original message:>Of course, this is an especially difficult case, as you must send the
>double-spend after the original transaction - normally just sending a
>non-standard tx to Eligius first would suffice. Note how this defeats
>Andresen's double-spend-relay patch(3) as proposed since the
>double-spend is a non-standard transaction.
Why can't you send a non-standard tx to Eligius first in this scenario?
Is it because LuckyBit is connected directly to Eligius, and does Eligius
relay (not only mine) non-standard transactions?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140423/169b24c1/attachment.html>;