On Sunday, August 29th, 2021 at 5:32 AM, Prayank via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Wanted to know if others think we should allow more numbers in transaction
> version by considering such transaction standard. I have shared an example
> how transaction version can be used to bet on something that involves 2
> outcomes:
> https://gist.github.com/prayank23/6f54e9a27f057abd1182436e7f88d1ac
I can't say I understand what you're suggesting, or what transaction version
numbers have to do with it, so take the following with the caveat that I may be
missing your point.
Generally, my view is that Bitcoin transactions should solely contain the
information necessary for the world to validate them. Given that, as of now,
there are no consensus rules (or even generally-adopted relay policies) that
care about the version number except it being 1 or 2 (due to BIP68), I would
say that the usage of anything but those 2 possible numbers is both pointless
and a gratuitous loss of privacy: for numbers with no protocol-defined meaning,
the usage of an uncommon one reveals something to the world that should be
privately communicated to the parties involved instead.
Combined with the fact that currently-unused version numbers may well be used
for future consensus rules like BIP68, which any use you're suggesting may
interfere with, I say no: versions numbers with no protocol-defined meaning
should not be standard. They are reserved for future extensions.
Cheers,
--
Pieter
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
