Why do nodes accept OP_RETURN addresses?

[BlackHatCoiner]

Since I can send funds to an OP_RETURN address it means that I'm instantly burning them. But OP_RETURN isn't an address at all, it is simply a form of text. Since no public keys hashed by SHA256 and then by base58 generate this kind of text, why do nodes accept it?

As far as I know, a wallet does not allow you to send bitcoins on a non-checksum address. Shouldn't nodes have this restriction too?

Also, aren't times that people have mistakenly sent funds on an OP_RETURN address?

Example of OP_RETURN address: d-3084c4f8200537ae7f90e126fa18e1bb

[1715304929]

1715304929

[1715304929]

1715304929

[ranochigo]

OP_Return scripts function differently from your normal output scripts. It doesn't act like an address and any funds sent to OP_Return gets burned as the UTXO is not added into the list. The node shouldn't check for the validity of any scripts that is denoted by op_return.

No one has actually mistakenly sent funds to an OP_Return address without knowing what they're doing. On the client side, the wallet would've prevented it and the user would have to explicitly specify that they want to embed a message through the use of OP_Return.

[BlackHatCoiner]

On the client side, the wallet would've prevented it and the user would have to explicitly specify that they want to embed a message through the use of OP_Return.

But blockchain is a ledger, not a messenger. These coins shouldn't be burnt for this purpose. Also, they're burn addresses like

1Lets1xxxx1use1xxxxxxxxxxxy2EaMkJ
1fuLL1xxxx1power1xxxxxxxxxxzatvCK
1of1xxxxx1anonymity1xxxxxxxz9JzFN
1See1xxxx1memo1xxxxxxxxxxxxxBuhPF
1dot1xxxxx1sv1xxxxxxxxxxxxxwYqEEt
1topic1xxx1hmwyda1xxxxxxxxxvo8wMn
1xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxy1kmdGr

They can be used as a message too.

[ranochigo]

But blockchain is a ledger, not a messenger. These coins shouldn't be burnt for this purpose. Also, they're burn addresses like

1Lets1xxxx1use1xxxxxxxxxxxy2EaMkJ
1fuLL1xxxx1power1xxxxxxxxxxzatvCK
1of1xxxxx1anonymity1xxxxxxxz9JzFN
1See1xxxx1memo1xxxxxxxxxxxxxBuhPF
1dot1xxxxx1sv1xxxxxxxxxxxxxwYqEEt
1topic1xxx1hmwyda1xxxxxxxxxvo8wMn
1xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxy1kmdGr

They can be used as a message too.

OP_return doesn't need the nodes to keep it's UTXO and it's better in terms of reducing Bitcoin bloat.

OP_return has a larger data field, than let's say an address due to the need for a valid checksum at the end. If anything, the burn addresses introduce much more bloat (both in terms of UTXO and the limited character space) to Bitcoin Blockchain. It's the only way to provably burn coins with 100% certainty.

[BrewMaster]

As far as I know, a wallet does not allow you to send bitcoins on a non-checksum address. Shouldn't nodes have this restriction too?

a wallet is a higher level abstraction that deals with the user and has to have certain protection for the user. one is to prevent them from accidentally send coins to scripts they don't understand ie. OP_RETURN here.
a node on the other hand is enforcing the protocol rules and since it is allowed in protocol to send coins to OP_RETURN they accept it.

wallets also don't have a lot of other functionalities. for example they don't let users send funds to any custom scripts, use locktime related OPs, change their public key type,... all for the same reason.

by the way one of the reasons why OP_RETURN was introduced into bitcoin was to prevent people from inserting messages into bitcoin blockchain using addresses like those examples without burdening the nodes.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Then why there is no message field that is saved on the blockchain? Everyone can write something with their transaction and they won't need to send x satoshis to an OP_RETURN address. They will simply pay it with the extra bytes they added.

I just don't understand why we have to burn coins. And why to send them to an address while we want to write a message. We don't want to credit anyone, we just want to stake a message.

[BrewMaster]

I just don't understand why we have to burn coins.

you don't. you simply set the amount field of the OP_RETURN output to zero and only have to pay the fees depending on the size of the transaction just like any other tx.

by the way bitcoin blockchain is not meant for "message staking". it is a ledger for monetary transfers.

[A-Bolt]

Example of OP_RETURN address: d-3084c4f8200537ae7f90e126fa18e1bb

It's not a Bitcoin address. It's just internal Blockchair ID for OP_RETURN data.
https://github.com/Blockchair/Blockchair.Support/issues/273