pull down to refresh
58 sats \ 1 reply \ @523ef332f6 19h \ on: Antoine Poinsot: Addressing Concerns on Relaxing Bitcoin Core's OP_RETURN Limits bitcoin
Thank you for posting this here, and putting up with all the drama.
Do you think that using fake public keys to store data is something that can or should be fixed in the long term?
Also what do you think about utreexo? Do you see a solution for scaling the chainstate long term?
Not the OP, but I can answer your questions :)
Posting data in fake keys or hashes cannot be fixed without major changes to the protocol. You would have to disallow any sort of hash output (no more p2pkh, p2wpkh, p2sh, p2wsh - which are all still used!) and enforce that public keys in bare pubkey outputs (p2tr, p2pk) are actually valid. However you can very easily grind public keys to still mostly contain the data you desire, or tweak them by adding something to them, so this doesn't really help either.
As for utreexo, there is work being done in Bitcoin Core to make it easier for utreexo nodes to re-use the Bitcoin Core code for their own implementations. There is a chance that Bitcoin Core will eventually adapt their validation model too. I do think their model is attractive, especially for running nodes on devices with restricted io capability.
reply