Bitcoin Forum
September 27, 2018, 11:16:11 PM *
News: ♦♦ New info! Bitcoin Core users absolutely must upgrade to previously-announced 0.16.3 [Torrent]. All Bitcoin users should temporarily trust confirmations slightly less. More info.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: What is the status of BIP62?  (Read 723 times)
jl2012
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1010


View Profile
August 27, 2015, 04:42:30 PM
 #1

There are 7 new rules in BIP62:

1. Canonically encoded ECDSA signatures
2. Non-push operations in scriptSig
3. Push operations in scriptSig of non-standard size type
4. Zero-padded number pushes
5. Inherent ECDSA signature malleability
6. Superfluous scriptSig operations
7. Inputs ignored by OP_CHECKMULTISIG and OP_CHECKMULTISIGVERIFY

1 has been deployed with BIP66.
2, 3, 4, 6, 7 are non-standard
5 is still allowed

Is there any schedule to deploy all the rules and what are the obstacles? Fixing malleability is very important for micropayment channels. Since we won't have a CHECKSIG 2.0 (as described in the Lightning Network paper) anytime soon, BIP62 is the easiest short term solution.

Donation address: 374iXxS4BuqFHsEwwxUuH3nvJ69Y7Hqur3 (Bitcoin ONLY)
LRDGENPLYrcTRssGoZrsCT1hngaH3BVkM4 (LTC)
PGP: D3CC 1772 8600 5BB8 FF67 3294 C524 2A1A B393 6517
Make a difference with your Ether.
Donate Ether for the greater good.
SPRING.WETRUST.IO
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1538090171
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1538090171

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1538090171
Reply with quote  #2

1538090171
Report to moderator
99Percent
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 198
Merit: 100



View Profile WWW
August 30, 2015, 11:40:09 PM
 #2

I agree, this needs to be prioritized!
gmaxwell
Moderator
Legendary
*
qt
Offline Offline

Activity: 2520
Merit: 1514



View Profile
August 31, 2015, 07:03:10 AM
 #3

BIP62 is neither necessary or sufficient for micropayment channels;  CLTV is sufficient and nearly necessary.   Thats next in the pipeline;  unfortunately BitcoinXT has screwed up the soft-fork pipeline by getting a bunch of nodes deployed that produce super high version numberss, breaking the existing CLTV code... so people are working on revising those proposals now.

Bitcoin will not be compromised
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!