[Lightning-dev] Lightning, the death of BIP62, and Segregated Witness
mark at friedenbach.org
Thu Nov 19 17:56:15 UTC 2015
The basic idea of the soft-fork plan is very simple --- have the
scriptPubKey be just the 20-byte hash of the redeem script. The scriptSig
of the spending input is empty. The actual scriptSig, with the redeem
script and signatures, is contained in a separate Merkle tree committed to
elsewhere in the block (e.g. in the last output of the coinbase, or the
last output of the last transaction).
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 7:31 AM, Greg Sanders <gsanders87 at gmail.com> wrote:
> The hardfork variant is quite simple, if I understood it correctly. You
> just stick the signatures in another parallel merkle tree. So if you don't
> want to validate signatures, just don't download them, and validate
> everything else. TXIDs don't use the signature at all. Nothing to malleate,
> AFAIK. Not sure what the softfork plan is, but it will be a talk at Scaling
> Bitcoin HK.
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Glenn Tarbox, PhD <glenn at tarbox.org>
>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 4:33 AM, sickpig at gmail.com <sickpig at gmail.com>
>>> Hi Pierre
>>> you could start here
>> There was a brief blip on Reddit:
>> Its weird how little information there is on Segregated Witness. I'm
>> guessing its a simple concept and those working on it (sipa / gmaxwell)
>> haven't felt the need to write it up.
>> That it "apparently" can be done with a soft fork similar to P2SH is good
>> news... I guess...
>> Glenn H. Tarbox, PhD
>> Lightning-dev mailing list
>> Lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> Lightning-dev mailing list
> Lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Lightning-dev