Have you deleted BIP? Or just moved somewhere else?
Topic: BIP62 and Lightning Network status (Read 1153 times)
Here explains why BIP62 can't solve the problem:
https://github.com/jl2012/bips/blob/segwit/bip-segwit.mediawiki#Trustfree_unconfirmed_transaction_dependency_chain
https://github.com/jl2012/bips/blob/segwit/bip-segwit.mediawiki#Trustfree_unconfirmed_transaction_dependency_chain
Segregated witness is a way better solution for malleability, plus more
Where can I read about segregated witness?
Any updates on LN? Current whitepaper requires BIP62's features.
BIP62 has nothing to do with LN
For segwit, go https://8333.info
Segregated witness is a way better solution for malleability, plus more
Where can I read about segregated witness?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/segregated-witness-the-solution-to-scalability-short-term-1279444
Segregated witness is a way better solution for malleability, plus more
Where can I read about segregated witness?
Any updates on LN? Current whitepaper requires BIP62's features.
As I see, BIP62 status is "withdrawn":
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0062.mediawiki
Are there any comments about this BIP? What's wrong with it?
And one more question: how to contact Lightning Network guys? I tried their official email, but it looks like my message got into SPAM box.
I have some questions about colored coins implementation on top of Lightning Network for fast trading of assets.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0062.mediawiki
Are there any comments about this BIP? What's wrong with it?
And one more question: how to contact Lightning Network guys? I tried their official email, but it looks like my message got into SPAM box.
I have some questions about colored coins implementation on top of Lightning Network for fast trading of assets.
Segregated witness is a way better solution for malleability, plus more
You certainly could trade colored coins over LN.
As I see, BIP62 status is "withdrawn":
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0062.mediawiki
Are there any comments about this BIP? What's wrong with it?
According to the commit that marks it as withdrawn:https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0062.mediawiki
Are there any comments about this BIP? What's wrong with it?
Quote
All of BIP62's (including the only-new-transactions) are currently enforced
as standardness rules, but it seems hard to push it further. Every new type
of complex transaction may require new extra rules, and some important types
of malleability cannot be addressed by it (for example, a single participant
in a multisig spend creating a new signature with a different nonce).
It seems wiser to pursue normalized txid or segregated witness-based
solutions, which do solve this problem more fundamentally.
as standardness rules, but it seems hard to push it further. Every new type
of complex transaction may require new extra rules, and some important types
of malleability cannot be addressed by it (for example, a single participant
in a multisig spend creating a new signature with a different nonce).
It seems wiser to pursue normalized txid or segregated witness-based
solutions, which do solve this problem more fundamentally.
As I see, BIP62 status is "withdrawn":
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0062.mediawiki
Are there any comments about this BIP? What's wrong with it?
And one more question: how to contact Lightning Network guys? I tried their official email, but it looks like my message got into SPAM box.
I have some questions about colored coins implementation on top of Lightning Network for fast trading of assets.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0062.mediawiki
Are there any comments about this BIP? What's wrong with it?
And one more question: how to contact Lightning Network guys? I tried their official email, but it looks like my message got into SPAM box.
I have some questions about colored coins implementation on top of Lightning Network for fast trading of assets.
Jump to: