📅 Original date posted:2022-01-26 📝 Original message:Hi, ...

2023-06-07T23:02:44Z

In reply to nevent1q…fcgs
_________________________

📅 Original date posted:2022-01-26
📝 Original message:Hi,

Lloyd, thanks for this excellent writeup. I must say that indeed using CTV
seems like it would very much lower the complexity of the DLC protocol (and
it seems like APO would also work, thanks Jonas for pointing that out).
Though thinking about it, I can't help wondering if the ideal op code for
DLC wouldn't actually be CHECKSIGFROMSTACK? It feels to me that this would
give the most natural way of doing things. If I'm not mistaken, this would
enable simply requiring an oracle signature over the outcome, without any
special trick, and without even needing the oracle to release a nonce in
advance (the oracle could sign `event_outcome + event_id` to avoid
signature reuse). I must say that I haven't studied covenant opcodes in
detail yet so is that line of thinking correct or am I missing something?

Cheers,

Thibaut

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 1:27 AM Jonas Nick via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Thank you, that's an interesting application of OP_CTV.
>
> Perhaps worth pointing out that this does not require OP_CTV but could
> also be
> enabled by other covenant constructions. For example, it seems like
> ANYPREVOUT-based covenants provide similar benefits. The script of the
> Taproot
> leaves could be set to
>
> <sig> <G> CHECKSIGVERIFY <CET_i> CHECKSIGVERIFY
>
> where <sig> is an ANYPREVOUTANYSCRIPT signature of the CET for public key
> P = G.
> When using nonce R = G, signature creation has negligible computational
> cost (s
> = 1 + H(R, P, m)). A downside compared to CTV is the additional overhead
> of 64
> witness bytes (<sig>).
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220127/6f228196/attachment-0001.html>;

📅 Original date posted:2021-12-27 📝 Original message:Hi ...

2023-06-07T23:01:39Z

In reply to nevent1q…6gtq
_________________________

📅 Original date posted:2021-12-27
📝 Original message:Hi all,

Did someone say rust-dlc? Just kidding, but wanted to mention that indeed
it's under active development, supports multi oracle contracts and many
other cool things (pretty much everything you can find in the dlc specs)!

Otherwise nice article Jeremy. Maybe you should drop by our monthly DLC
spec meeting one of these days. I'm sure everybody would be happy to hear
how we could improve the Bitcoin derivatives ecosystem with CTV and what
infrastructures or code could be reused from DLCs.

Cheers,

Thibaut

On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 7:39 AM yancy via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Prayank,
>
> I believe the p2pderivatives DLC application is still under active
> development here (single oracle):
> https://github.com/p2pderivatives/rust-dlc
>
> I was once involved in the project in a galaxy far far away but haven't
> kept up with the project. Also, I'm a few days behind in the Bitcoin
> Advent Calendar :)
>
> Cheers,
> -Yancy
>
>
> On 2021-12-24 17:42, Prayank via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > Hi Jeremy,
> >
> >> Wheres the info come from? Well, multiple places. We could get it
> > from a third party (maybe using an attestation chain of some sort?),
> > or there are certain ways it could be self-referential (like for
> > powswap [1]).
> >
> >> Now let’s define a threshold oracle – we wouldn’t want to
> > trust just one lousy oracle, so let’s trust M out of N of them!
> >
> > Similar approach is used in discreet log contracts for multi oracles.
> > There is even a project for P2P derivatives but it was not used for
> > any real trades on mainnet or further developed. What difference would
> > OP_CTV make in this project if its implemented in Bitcoin?
> >
> > https://github.com/p2pderivatives/p2pderivatives-client
> >
> > https://github.com/p2pderivatives/p2pderivatives-server
> >
> > https://github.com/p2pderivatives/p2pderivatives-oracle
> >
> >> Does this NEED CTV?
> >
> > No, not in particular. Most of this stuff could be done with online
> > signer server federation between you and counterparty. CTV makes some
> > stuff nicer though, and opens up new possibilities for opening these
> > contracts unilaterally.
> >
> > Nicer? How would unilateral derivatives work because my understanding
> > was that you always need a peer to take the other side of the trade. I
> > wish we could discuss this topic in a trading community with some
> > Bitcoiners that even had some programming knowledge.
> >
> > Derivatives are interesting and less explored or used in Bitcoin
> > projects. They could be useful in solving lot of problems.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Prayank
> >
> > A3B1 E430 2298 178F
> >
> >
> > Links:
> > ------
> > [1] https://powswap.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
> > bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20211227/a1d82a30/attachment.html>;

Nostr notes by Thibaut Le Guilly [ARCHIVE]

📅 Original date posted:2022-01-26 📝 Original message:Hi, ...

📅 Original date posted:2021-12-27 📝 Original message:Hi ...