Re: [BIP-draft] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - An opcode for relative locktime (Btc Drak)

Re: [BIP-draft] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - An opcode for relative locktime (Btc Drak)
2015-08-13 16:36 ` Matt Corallo
  
From: Nicolas Dorier @ 2015-08-13 16:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bitcoin-dev

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 261 bytes --]

Would be wonderful to have this pushed together with CLTV and BIP68.
If BIP68 get pushed in the next fork, this CSV is a no brainer.

Was there a competing RCLTV implementation somewhere that did not depend on
BIP68 for information ? I don't manage to find it.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 333 bytes --]

 permalink raw reply	[|nested]
2015-08-13 16:34 [bitcoin-dev] [BIP-draft] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - An opcode for relative locktime (Btc Drak) Nicolas Dorier

  
From: Matt Corallo @ 2015-08-13 16:36 UTC ( / )
  To: Nicolas Dorier, Nicolas Dorier via bitcoin-dev, bitcoin-dev



On August 13, 2015 7:34:03 PM GMT+03:00, Nicolas Dorier via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>Would be wonderful to have this pushed together with CLTV and BIP68.
>If BIP68 get pushed in the next fork, this CSV is a no brainer.
>
>Was there a competing RCLTV implementation somewhere that did not
>depend on
>BIP68 for information ? I don't manage to find it.

I think all such competing proposals are dropped because this seemed like a better idea. Feel free to revive one/come up with one, though.

Matt