3 ms·
That's a good idea for filesystems. But OpenTimestamps Proofs aren't really "written to". They're created, and then later validated. Also, being cryptographic p
by petertodd 2y ago
That's a good idea for filesystems. But OpenTimestamps Proofs aren't really "written to". They're created, and then later validated. Also, being cryptographic proofs, my philosophy is the validator should almost always understand them 100%, or not at all, to avoid any false proofs.
That's also why I picked a binary encoding: it's difficult to parse an OTS proof incorrectly. An incorrect implementation will almost always fail to parse the proof at all, with a clear error, rather than silently parse the proof incorrectly.
- RustyRussell 2y agoWe use the same for Lightning: even bits for incompatible changes, odd for backwards compatible changes.