Dmitry Petukhov [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2020-09-24 📝 Original message:В Wed, 23 Sep 2020 ...
📅 Original date posted:2020-09-24
📝 Original message:В Wed, 23 Sep 2020 15:10:22 -0700
Jeremy via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> It's not particularly important that a transaction be in the same
> block once sponsored, it could also be in the last 100 blocks (the
> opposite of proposed change 3).
This will in effect enable "inverse timelock" mechanism for up to 100
blocks for sponsor transactions: broadcast a transaction A, and
then make a pre-signed sponsor transaction B that sponsors A.
Transaction B will become invalid after 100 blocks due to this rule.
If you put a timelock on B to make it valid after 50 blocks,
then it will be valid between block 50 and 100 after A is confirmed.
📝 Original message:В Wed, 23 Sep 2020 15:10:22 -0700
Jeremy via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> It's not particularly important that a transaction be in the same
> block once sponsored, it could also be in the last 100 blocks (the
> opposite of proposed change 3).
This will in effect enable "inverse timelock" mechanism for up to 100
blocks for sponsor transactions: broadcast a transaction A, and
then make a pre-signed sponsor transaction B that sponsors A.
Transaction B will become invalid after 100 blocks due to this rule.
If you put a timelock on B to make it valid after 50 blocks,
then it will be valid between block 50 and 100 after A is confirmed.