Re: [bitcoin-dev] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - We need more usecases to motivate the change

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:26 AM, Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev wrote: > ... Gavin just told me about setmocktime. That's fast service! Once more functions (specially consensus-critical functions) take nTime explicitly as parameter instead of relying on the

[bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin dev IRC meeting in layman's terms (2015-10-15)

Once again my attempt to summerize and explain the weekly bitcoin developer meeting in layman's terms. Link to last weeks summerization ( https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3o7bi6/bitcoin_dev_meeting_in_laymans_terms_2015108/ ) Link to this weeks on reddit:

[bitcoin-dev] [BIP] Normalized transaction IDs

After spending some more time on the normalized transaction ID proposal and reworking it to be a soft-fork (thanks sipa for helping me figuring out how), I'd like to propose the BIP again. As with the previous version, which was using a hard-fork, the normalized transaction ID is computed only

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP] Normalized transaction IDs

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Christian Decker via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > As with the previous version, which was using a hard-fork, the normalized > transaction ID is computed only considering the non-malleable parts of a > transaction, i.e., stripping

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Memory leaks?

My nodes are continuously running getblocktemplate and getinfo, and I also suspected the issue is in either gbt or the rpc server. The instance only takes a few hours to get up to that memory usage. On Oct 18, 2015 8:59 AM, "Jonathan Toomim via bitcoin-dev" <

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP] Normalized transaction IDs

Yes, this has been pointed out in the PR as well. Transactions inputs must also be normalized by replacing malleable hashes with the normalized hashes. I will fix the spec and the implementation to reflect this :-) Regards, Christian On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 5:24 PM Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev <

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP] Normalized transaction IDs

So what exactly is used to create the normalized txid (sha256 hash of what data)? I've read in the linked BIP draft that it will strip the 'malleable parts' but didn't understand what exactly will be used to calculate the normalized transactions ids and how will the change apply retro-active for

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Memory leaks?

I should also mention that this is definitely not an attack coming from connected nodes. My node experiencing the issue is only connected to 3 other nodes, all of which I control (via connect=). --Adam On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Multipool Admin wrote: > My nodes are