Masked bits and isStandard

Masked bits and isStandard
From: Dave Scotese @ 2015-10-10 21:41 UTC ( / )
  To: Bitcoin Dev



Thanks again.  The description of bits 16..29 as "can take any value"
suggests to me an improvement for isStandard: if any bits "can take any
value" without affecting the script then they must be off for the script to
pass isStandard.

If I understand it correctly, this requirement will serve as a backup to
future uses of those bits if such uses are deployed as soft forks.

I'm sorry if my suggestion reflects a poor understanding of isStandard, but
I offer it as evidence on whether the mechanism is as well understood as it
should be, since we use soft forks.  If I have misunderstood, feel free to
educate me with a reply.

Thanks!
Notplato



On Oct 10, 2015, at 8:22 AM, G1lius Caesar via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:


bits 16..29 are masked off and can take any value.



-- 
I like to provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do you need a
techie?
I own Litmocracy <http://www.litmocracy.com> and Meme Racing
<http://www.memeracing.net> (in alpha).
I'm the webmaster for The Voluntaryist <http://www.voluntaryist.com> which
now accepts Bitcoin.
I also code for The Dollar Vigilante <http://dollarvigilante.com/>.
"He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules" - Satoshi
Nakamoto