Martijn Meijering [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2016-03-08 📝 Original message: Now that we almost have ...
📅 Original date posted:2016-03-08
📝 Original message:
Now that we almost have SegWit and its soft fork mechanism for upgrading
the scripting system, wouldn't it be a good idea to introduce a new opcode
for signature verification for arbitrary but appropriately
length-restricted messages? Instead of maintaining mirror images of txs and
going through the dance of revealing hash preimages, wouldn't it be easier
to to sign a message that revokes a previous balance (with hash + sequence
number)? Am I overlooking anything? This looks like a simple new opcode
that could substantially simplify the LN protocol.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20160308/cdec7da8/attachment-0001.html>;
📝 Original message:
Now that we almost have SegWit and its soft fork mechanism for upgrading
the scripting system, wouldn't it be a good idea to introduce a new opcode
for signature verification for arbitrary but appropriately
length-restricted messages? Instead of maintaining mirror images of txs and
going through the dance of revealing hash preimages, wouldn't it be easier
to to sign a message that revokes a previous balance (with hash + sequence
number)? Am I overlooking anything? This looks like a simple new opcode
that could substantially simplify the LN protocol.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20160308/cdec7da8/attachment-0001.html>;