We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
prevtx
TxAddInput
Option
It looks like there are cases where prevtx can be omitted. See recent spec meeting notes here: lightning/bolts#1129 (comment) and the linked Delving Bitcoin post by t-bast, specifically:
That means that for lightning, we should only drop the prevtx field if: this is a splice transaction of a taproot channel (there is a shared input that uses taproot and requires signatures from both participants) or each participant adds at least one taproot input to the transaction
That means that for lightning, we should only drop the prevtx field if:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Looks like this is being pushed back for now: niftynei/lightning-rfc#18 (comment)
Sorry, something went wrong.
Looks like this is being pushed back for now
Thanks. It makes sense to close this as the comment you linked to imply additional work beyond the original suggestion.
dunxen
No branches or pull requests
It looks like there are cases where
prevtx
can be omitted.See recent spec meeting notes here: lightning/bolts#1129 (comment) and the linked Delving Bitcoin post by t-bast, specifically:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: