BIP68: update specification to assume MTP #260

pull btcdrak wants to merge 2 commits into bitcoin:master from btcdrak:bip68mtp changing 1 files +5 −3
  1. btcdrak commented at 8:08 PM on December 10, 2015: contributor

    BIP68 and BIP113 will be deployed together which simplifies the specification slightly

  2. BIP68 now assume MTP in all instances 7239c330c7
  3. Update deployment specification
    BIP68 must be deployed with BIP113 because MTP calculations are
    used by this BIP.
    df9d34d537
  4. in bip-0068.mediawiki:None in ed1a211673 outdated
      29 | @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ If bit (1 << 31) of the sequence number is not set, then the sequence number is
      30 |  
      31 |  The sequence number encoding is interpreted as follows: 
      32 |  
      33 | -Bit (1 << 22) determines if the relative lock-time is time-based or block based: If the bit is set, the relative lock-time specifies a timespan in units of 512 seconds granularity. The timespan starts from the median-time-past (MTP) of the output’s previous block, and ends either at the MTP of the previous block or at the nTime of the transaction’s block (depending on the enforcement status of BIP113). If the bit is not set, the relative lock-time specifies a number of blocks.
      34 | +Bit (1 << 22) determines if the relative lock-time is time-based or block based: If the bit is set, the relative lock-time specifies a timespan in units of 512 seconds granularity. The timespan starts from the median-time-past (MTP) of the output’s previous block, and ends either at the MTP of the previous block or at the nTime of the transaction’s block as defined by BIP113. If the bit is not set, the relative lock-time specifies a number of blocks.
    


    morcos commented at 8:12 PM on December 10, 2015:

    I would just say this: ", and ends at the MTP of the previous block." and get rid of the "or ... BIP113"

  5. in bip-0068.mediawiki:None in ed1a211673 outdated
      42 | @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ For time based relative lock-time, 512 second granularity was chosen because bit
      43 |  When the relative lock-time is time-based, it is interpreted as a minimum block-time constraint over the input's age. A relative time-based lock-time of zero indicates an input which can be included in any block. More generally, a relative time-based lock-time n can be included into any block produced 512 * n seconds after the mining date of the output it is spending, or any block thereafter.
      44 |  The mining date of the output is equals to the median-time-past of the previous block which mined it.
      45 |  
      46 | -The block produced time is either equals to median time past of its parent or to its nTime field, depending on the state of BIP113 median-time-past.
      47 | +The block produced time is equal to the median-time-past of its parent according to BIP113.
    


    morcos commented at 8:13 PM on December 10, 2015:

    "The block produced time is equal to the median-time-past of its pervious block."

  6. in bip-0068.mediawiki:None in ed1a211673 outdated
     190 | @@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ This BIP was edited by BtcDrak, Nicolas Dorier and kinoshitajona.
     191 |  
     192 |  This BIP is to be deployed by either version-bits BIP9 or by isSuperMajority(). Exact details TDB.
     193 |  
     194 | -It is recommended to deploy BIP112 and BIP113 at the same time as this BIP.
     195 | +BIP68 MUST be deployed together with BIP113. It is also recommended to deploy BIP112 at the same time.
    


    morcos commented at 8:13 PM on December 10, 2015:

    not necessary, but fine.

  7. btcdrak force-pushed on Dec 10, 2015
  8. afk11 commented at 2:23 AM on December 11, 2015: contributor

    ACK

  9. petertodd commented at 6:42 AM on December 11, 2015: contributor

    ACK

  10. luke-jr added the label Proposed BIP modification on Dec 11, 2015
  11. luke-jr referenced this in commit 6bfc0151a7 on Dec 11, 2015
  12. luke-jr merged this on Dec 11, 2015
  13. luke-jr closed this on Dec 11, 2015

  14. NicolasDorier cross-referenced this on Dec 14, 2015 from issue BIP-68: Mempool-only sequence number constraint verification by maaku
  15. NicolasDorier commented at 11:09 AM on December 14, 2015: contributor

    Well, too bad I did not see that before, it broke completely #6312, which was well reviewed and assumed same MTP policy for both nLockTime and sequence lock time.

  16. btcdrak commented at 1:33 PM on December 14, 2015: contributor

    @NicolasDorier This was agreed at the IRC meeting. I am leaning for 7184 to replace 6312 in any case.

  17. btcdrak deleted the branch on Dec 14, 2015

github-metadata-mirror

This is a metadata mirror of the GitHub repository bitcoin/bips. This site is not affiliated with GitHub. Content is generated from a GitHub metadata backup.
generated: 2026-04-14 11:10 UTC

This site is hosted by @0xB10C
More mirrored repositories can be found on mirror.b10c.me