I'll just mention that non-interactive one-way aggregation with BLS
signatures solves this problem rather nicely.
On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 10:31 PM, Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Anthony Towns via bitcoin-dev
> writes:
> > If you've got one bundle
Anthony Towns via bitcoin-dev writes:
> If you've got one bundle that overpays fees and another that underpays,
> you can safely combine the two only if you can put a SIGHASH_ALL sig in
> the one that overpays (otherwise miners could just make their own tx of
> just the overpaying bundle).
This i
On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 09:16:45AM +0930, Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Proposal: Two bits: SIGHASH_BUNDLESTART/SIGHASH_INBUNDLE
>
>
> A signature needs to indicate that signs only part of a transaction's
> inputs and outputs (a.k.a. a "bundle"). Bundles can be combined
> togeth
Hi all!
Since there's activity on new signature types, I think it's
worth considering a more flexible alternative to
SIGHASH_SINGLE|SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY. See Usefulness for why.
Proposal: Two bits: SIGHASH_BUNDLESTART/SIGHASH_INBUNDLE
A signature needs to indicate that signs on
