Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Pre-BIP] Motivating Address type for OP_RETURN

2021-04-24 Thread Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
Zac -- this is kind of offtopic for this thread, which is primarily to do with making software/standards that supports existing practices in the bitcoin community rather than new standards/formats for a similar task. I think there have been some other related posts recently where it might be more

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Pre-BIP] Motivating Address type for OP_RETURN

2021-04-24 Thread Zac Greenwood via bitcoin-dev
> 1. More data allowed in scriptSig, e.g. 80 byte payload (81 actually, I > think) for OP_RETURN versus 40 bytes for a BIP141 payload. > Maximizing payload size better amortizes the overhead cost of the > containing transaction and the output's nValue field. In order to reduce the footprint

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Pre-BIP] Motivating Address type for OP_RETURN

2021-04-24 Thread Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
I guess in the interest of being clear; I don't particularly want a OP_RETURN address either, they're just annoying to program around, and they exist historically, as well as perhaps in the future. Maybe people will start using the annex space to add any metadata required? E.g. stealth addresses.

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Pre-BIP] Motivating Address type for OP_RETURN

2021-04-24 Thread David A. Harding via bitcoin-dev
On Sat, Apr 24, 2021 at 01:05:25PM -0700, Jeremy wrote: > I meant the type itself is too wide, not the length of the value. As in > Script can represent things we know nothing about. I guess I still don't understand your concern, then. If script can represent things we know nothing about, then s

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Pre-BIP] Motivating Address type for OP_RETURN

2021-04-24 Thread Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
Inline responses On Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 11:18 AM David A. Harding wrote: > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 08:46:07AM -0700, Jeremy via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > > > > > * > Script is technically "too wide" a type as what I really want is to > > only return coins with known output types. I don't understand

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Pre-BIP] Motivating Address type for OP_RETURN

2021-04-23 Thread David A. Harding via bitcoin-dev
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 08:46:07AM -0700, Jeremy via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Script is technically "too wide" a type as what I really want is to > only return coins with known output types. I don't understand this concern. If script is too wide a type, then OP_RETURN being a scriptPubKey of arbitrar

[bitcoin-dev] [Pre-BIP] Motivating Address type for OP_RETURN

2021-04-20 Thread Jeremy via bitcoin-dev
Hi All, Introducing the notion that we might want to have an address type defined for OP_RETURN. I came across this when writing some code that wanted to handle common classes of user transactions generically, it's kind of annoying that you have to write code that's effectively: ``` try { pri