Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Newsletters: add 180 (2021-12-22) #702

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 22, 2021

Conversation

harding
Copy link
Collaborator

@harding harding commented Dec 17, 2021

Still some minor items to finish before this PR is complete, but the text is ready for review. I did leave myself a few optional todos if I have some spare time and want to make this a bit longer.

Copy link
Contributor

@bitschmidty bitschmidty left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks amazing so far!

_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
that contain all the information necessary to allow a wallet or other
program to track payments made to or spent from a particular script or
set of related scripts (i.e. an address or a set of related addresses
such as in an HD wallet). Descriptors combine well with [miniscript][topic miniscript] in
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

suggest linking to /en/topics/hd-key-generation/ topic

_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
September, a new `OP_TAPLEAF_UPDATE_VERIFY` opcode was
[proposed][op_tluv] for creating these sort of covenants in a way that
takes particular advantage of taproot's ability to spend funds either
using just a signature (keypath spending) or a MAST-like tree of scripts
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggest MAST link to /en/topics/mast/

@bitschmidty
Copy link
Contributor

bitschmidty commented Dec 21, 2021

I would like to add the following to the email version of this newsletter:

"Due to the length of this Year-in-Review Special edition of the newsletter, some email clients may abruptly cut off the email's contents. Please view this [newsletter's web page][link to newsletter page] for the full newsletter."

Would place this before the "Contents" heading.

Copy link
Collaborator

@murchandamus murchandamus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks very good, and learned about something already again! :)
Happy holidays.

_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines 253 to 293
state. Dual-funding is particularly useful for merchants whose primary
use of LN is receiving payments instead of sending them.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's not clear to me why Dual-funding would be helpful for users that primarily receive. Either way, the counterparty has to either open the channel or participate in opening. Perhaps this point could be elaborated.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll be pushing an edit but I'm not 100% sure it addresses your concern---I'm confused about why you're confused---so let me know if it doesn't help.

capabilities

- [Bitcoin Core 22.0][] included support for [I2P][topic anonymity
networks] connections, removed support for [version 2 Tor][topic
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't see the same link anywhere else. I think you may be referring to the version 2 address announcements in the Bitcoin Core 0.21.0 notes, which refer to the format how to announce node addresses, while the "version 2 Tor" here refers to Tor versions.

in Bitcoin Core, the first step towards package relay. [Package
relay][topic package relay] will allow relay nodes and miners to treat
packages of related transactions as if they were a single transaction
for fee purposes. A package might contain a parent transaction with a
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
for fee purposes. A package might contain a parent transaction with a
for feerate purposes. A package might contain a parent transaction with a

_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@glozow glozow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks awesome so far

_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines 244 to 283
risks to contract protocols such as LN from unexpected transaction relay
behavior.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
risks to contract protocols such as LN from unexpected transaction relay
behavior.
impact of transaction relay policy on contract protocols such as LN.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I made a slight edit here, but I wanted to try to understand your reason for suggesting this change.

_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
proposals][bip118 update] were updated to use taproot or [lessons
learned][bip119 update] from its activation.

- **August<!--taproot-->** was quiet for development, although some
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
- **August<!--taproot-->** was quiet for development, although some
- **August<!--taproot-->** was quiet for taproot development, although some

Comment on lines +75 to +115
[Channel jamming attacks][topic channel jamming attacks], a known
problem for LN since 2015, received continued discussion throughout the
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

IIUC, first described in 2015 but always a been a problem?

Suggested change
[Channel jamming attacks][topic channel jamming attacks], a known
problem for LN since 2015, received continued discussion throughout the
[Channel jamming attacks][topic channel jamming attacks], a known
problem for LN discussed since 2015, received continued discussion throughout the

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it wasn't "known" before then, and the description of it was before there actually was a LN (i.e. pre-segwit), so it wasn't exploitable originally.

_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@adamjonas adamjonas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Made it through July. I'll try to pick it up later this afternoon.

_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
_posts/en/newsletters/2021-12-22-newsletter.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@harding
Copy link
Collaborator Author

harding commented Dec 21, 2021

Made edits (or left a reply) for all feedback. Thank you soooo much @bitschmidty @xekyo @glozow @adamjonas !!!

this key safety issue.

An idea original proposed in 2019 for LN saw renewed life in June. The
original *fast forwards* idea described how an LN wallet could receive
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

suggest adding link/credit to https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/2019-April/001986.html like the ff expanded link in the following sentence. (though admittedly this could be found by clicking the next link)

After years of discussion, January saw the first [release][bcc21] of a
Bitcoin Core version supporting [signets][topic signet], following prior
[support][cl#2816] by C-Lightning and followed by [support][lnd#5025] in
LND. Signets are test networks anyone can used to simulate Bitcoin's
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
LND. Signets are test networks anyone can used to simulate Bitcoin's
LND. Signets are test networks anyone can be used to simulate Bitcoin's

Copy link

@lsilva01 lsilva01 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Amazing content.
An excellent summary of the main events of the year with a good number of links to technical explanations (such as why the taproot addresses don't use public key hash).

@bitschmidty bitschmidty merged commit abaad7f into bitcoinops:master Dec 22, 2021
@bitschmidty
Copy link
Contributor

Squashed and merged! Thank you @harding for a great edition and a great year! Thanks to @xekyo @glozow @adamjonas @lsilva01 for the reviews.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants