Version 2 transactions remain non-standard until CSV activates #7835

pull sdaftuar wants to merge 3 commits into bitcoin:master from sdaftuar:CSV-relay-after-softfork changing 4 files +63 −17

sdaftuar commented at 7:09 PM on April 7, 2016: member

Before activation, such transactions might not be reliably mined, so don't allow into the mempool.

Please tag for backport to 0.12.1

Version 2 transactions remain non-standard until CSV activates

Before activation, such transactions might not be mined, so don't
allow into the mempool.

e4ba9f6b04

Tests: move get_bip9_status to util.py 5cb1d8a207
Test relay of version 2 transactions da5fdbb3a2
laanwj added the label Validation on Apr 7, 2016
morcos commented at 7:35 PM on April 7, 2016: member

utACK
jonasschnelli added the label Needs backport on Apr 7, 2016
petertodd commented at 7:58 PM on April 7, 2016: contributor

utACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7835/commits/da5fdbb3a2778523cce70d635c1aa2b31a693bc6
jonasschnelli commented at 7:59 PM on April 7, 2016: contributor

utACK da5fdbb3a2778523cce70d635c1aa2b31a693bc6
paveljanik commented at 8:00 PM on April 7, 2016: contributor

ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7835/commits/da5fdbb3a2778523cce70d635c1aa2b31a693bc6
btcdrak commented at 8:01 PM on April 7, 2016: contributor

tACK da5fdbb
in src/main.cpp:None in da5fdbb3a2
```
1024 | @@ -1025,6 +1025,14 @@ bool AcceptToMemoryPoolWorker(CTxMemPool& pool, CValidationState& state, const C
1025 |      if (fRequireStandard && !IsStandardTx(tx, reason))
1026 |          return state.DoS(0, false, REJECT_NONSTANDARD, reason);
1027 |  
1028 | +    // Don't relay version 2 transactions until CSV is active, and we can be
1029 | +    // sure that such transactions will be mined (unless we're on
1030 | +    // -testnet/-regtest).
1031 | +    const CChainParams& chainparams = Params();
```
jtimon commented at 8:03 PM on April 7, 2016:

Can you move this to the top of the function (other parts of the function before this also call Params() and could use the variable in the future)?

sdaftuar commented at 8:07 PM on April 7, 2016:

Nothing above in this function calls Params(); I guess I didn't check the functions called from here to see if they call Params(), but can we please fix that later when we change those functions? This has many ACKs now and is holding up 0.12.1.

btcdrak commented at 8:47 AM on April 8, 2016:

@sdaftuar I agree, it's not important for this pull.

jtimon commented at 9:19 AM on April 8, 2016:

Sorry, I was in another branch, You are right for master. If you need to change the code for any other reason, I would appreciate moving this line too though.
dcousens commented at 1:40 AM on April 8, 2016: contributor

utACK da5fdbb, but agreed with @jtimon.
jl2012 commented at 9:28 AM on April 8, 2016: contributor

tACK da5fdbb
CodeShark commented at 9:39 AM on April 8, 2016: contributor

utACK da5fdbb3a2778523cce70d635c1aa2b31a693bc6
NicolasDorier commented at 9:59 AM on April 8, 2016: contributor

utACK da5fdbb
laanwj merged this on Apr 8, 2016
laanwj closed this on Apr 8, 2016
laanwj referenced this in commit 0afac87e81 on Apr 8, 2016
laanwj referenced this in commit 46898e7e94 on Apr 8, 2016
laanwj referenced this in commit 465d30915c on Apr 8, 2016
MarcoFalke commented at 10:42 PM on June 9, 2016: member

This was backported as 46898e7. Removing label
MarcoFalke removed the label Needs backport on Jun 9, 2016
MarcoFalke locked this on Sep 8, 2021

Contributors

Labels