This October 4, two developers presented BIP-447, an improvement proposal for Bitcoin (BIP-447) that introduces a Soft Fork (soft bifurcation), a change in the rules that nodes can adopt without fragmenting the network.
Entitled “Poda of op_return without breaking the re-verification of the Merkle tree + selective reduction of the block space for transactions with arbitrary data”, BIP-447 addresses the use of registrationsas data such as texts or images, embedded in Bitcoin through op_return, a code that adds non -monetary information to transactions.
As cryptootics reported, operations with op_return have led to the current «Customer War »reflecting tensions between different approaches that the authors of BIP-447 consider problematic:
- On the one hand, Luke Dashjr introduced in Bitcoin Knots a filtered by patterns to block transactions with inscriptions. That filtering, as read in the repository of BIP-447encourage users to avoid the P2P (person to person) network and send their transactions directly to large pools, concentrating mining power on those platforms.
- On the other, in Bitcoin Core V.30, the next version of this client that will come out this month, it was proposed illegal content Like child pornographywhich could cause them problems.
How does BIP-447 work in Bitcoin?
The BIP-447 text details its operation in three key points.
First, he points to mitigate registration in transactions through a Soft Fork that would increase the costs of complex scripts (programs that execute actions) without expanding the capacity of the blocks.
If specified, the Soft Fork would cause them Inscriptions with op_return cost 4 times more that today.
This circumstance would exercise economic pressure against what the authors understand as “abuse of the blockchain”, preserving the efficiency of standard transactions.
As detailed, the new nodes would assign greater weights to transactions with op_return greater than 32 bytes, but would respect the virtual weight limit of up to 4 megabytes, established by Segwit, which the ancient nodes also recognize.
That would ensure that the blocks remain valid for all and preserve consensus of the network.
Second, BIP-447 follows a deployment model known as “UASF” (soft user activated), which allows nodes Impose these rules without relying on developer groups They have not solved the problem.
In such a way, this UASF would give nodes the ability to make individual decisions Apart from customer policy.
Third, integrate the Segidata Pudable Storage Optiona method that, inspired by ideas such as Segwit (which separates verification data to save space), allows the nodes to save only the essential parts of the transactions and discard the rest, relieveing their load.
This integration would offer nodes operators Economic protection by reducing hardware costs and legal protection By avoiding storing problematic content.
What points to improve BIP-447 in Bitcoin?
Among the aspects that the proposal promises to improve is:
- Reduce load for light nodes, allowing them to verify transactions Without storing the entire UTXO state (Non -spent transaction outputs), which makes them more accessible.
- Decrease bandwidth consumption by transmitting supplementary data only when necessary, optimizing traffic.
- Facilitate gradual scalability that adapts the network to nodes of different capacities without sacrificing security. In addition, by lowering the operating costs for less powerful nodes, It encourages that more participants operate themreinforcing decentralization.
To discourage the excessive use of space in the Bitcoin file, op_return outputs greater than 32 bytes They would face a four -time costeliminating the weight discount that allows us to include up to 4 MB for 1 MB of space, as with Segwit.
In contrast, the secdata commitments of 32 bytes would not incur this additional penalty, since its design avoids the weight gain applied to large data, allowing the nodes to manage them Without penalizing space busy.
With that scheme, an economic pressure would be created for users leave heavy inscriptions or migrate to printed formats such as segdata.
We can see it with a hypothetical example, contributed by the authors of the proposal.
According to your document, The economic impact of BIP-447 would be significant. The inscriptions of “1 MB would be reduced from four to one per block (75 % less), and those of 100 kb from 40 to 10 (75 % less)”.
These modifications would make inscriptions too expensive to continue using them indiscriminately, according to the text.
The authors of the proposal illustrate how, with a price of 20 satoshis per virtual byte (sat/vb), the cost of bitcoin transactions varies dramatically according to their type.
For example, a simple operation would cost about 2,800 satoshis (around $ 2.80 with a BTC at $ 124,000) and a multifirma 2-DE-3 (Multisig) would rise to about 3,200 Satoshis ($ 3.20).
However, in the case of registrations of 1 MB, the price is I would shoot up to 20,000,000 Satoshis (about $ 20,000)four times more than the current 5,000,000 soats ($ 5,000).