Good morning Olauluwa,
I believe P2WSH is larger due to the script hash commitment in the
`scriptPubKey` as well as the actual script revelation in the `witnessScript`,
whereas, a flat OP_TRUE in the `scriptPubKey` is much smaller and can be spent
with an empty `scriptSig`. It seems this is the entirety of the reason to
desire an isStandard OP_TRUE.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On May 9, 2018 8:24 AM, Olaoluwa Osuntokun via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> What are the downsides of just using p2wsh? This route can be rolled out
> immediately, while policy changes are pretty "fuzzy" and would require a near
> uniform rollout in order to ensure wide propagation of the commitment
> transactions.
>
> On Tue, May 8, 2018, 4:58 PM Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The largest problem we are having today with the lightning
>> protocol is trying to predict future fees. Eltoo solves this elegantly,
>> but meanwhile we would like to include a 546 satoshi OP_TRUE output in
>> commitment transactions so that we use minimal fees and then use CPFP
>> (which can't be done at the moment due to CSV delays on outputs).
>>
>> Unfortunately, we'd have to P2SH it at the moment as a raw 'OP_TRUE' is
>> non-standard. Are there any reasons not to suggest such a policy
>> change?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Rusty.
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
