Search results
Create the page "Protocol specification)" on this wiki! See also the search results found.
Page title matches
- #REDIRECT [[Protocol documentation]]36 bytes (3 words) - 19:52, 15 April 2015
- #REDIRECT [[Protocol documentation#Block_Headers]]50 bytes (5 words) - 16:10, 6 November 2018
Page text matches
- '''bitcoind''' is a program that implements the Bitcoin protocol for remote procedure call (RPC) use. It is also the second Bitcoin [[Client * [[Protocol specification|Bitcoin network protocol]]17 KB (2,172 words) - 01:37, 10 June 2019
- ....com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/62f2d769e45043c1f262ed45babb70fe237ad2bb/src/rpc/protocol.h#L30 rpcprotocol.h] for the list of error codes and their meanings. * [[Protocol specification]]13 KB (1,835 words) - 12:49, 27 June 2020
- ...articular, while this page is quite complete in describing the [[network]] protocol, it does not attempt to list all of the rules for block or transaction vali For protocol used in mining, see [[getblocktemplate]].59 KB (8,414 words) - 18:08, 30 July 2021
- More information and in-depth technical information is in the [[Protocol Specification]]. * [[Protocol Specification]]8 KB (1,270 words) - 14:13, 13 June 2018
- ...t is undefined. Versions greater than 2 are reserved for future use by the protocol. Flag and Witness are mandatory for any transaction that includes [[Segwit] ...hash, which has a specific definition for scriptPubKey, and scriptSig. The specification places no limitations on the script, and hence absolutely any contract can15 KB (2,222 words) - 09:52, 17 January 2024
- A full description of the protocol is in [[Contract#Example_7:_Rapidly-adjusted_.28micro.29payments_to_a_pre-d ...in-dev mailing lists<ref name="bitcoin_dev_bip65"/>, and included a design specification in [https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0065.mediawiki BIP65].15 KB (2,209 words) - 07:45, 4 October 2021
- ...oves usability by allowing for infinite binary division (note that Bitcoin protocol support is still finite). == Specification ==9 KB (1,334 words) - 23:59, 3 May 2017
- The protocol change specification is given in [https://github.com/btc1/specifications/blob/master/PCS/PCS-201903 bytes (127 words) - 15:07, 11 January 2018
- ==Specification== It indicates that the subtree of this node is used according to this specification.9 KB (1,520 words) - 13:01, 12 October 2019
- An alternate implementation of the Bitcoin network protocol. * [[Protocol specification|Bitcoin Network Protocol]]678 bytes (77 words) - 16:55, 25 June 2011
- This is a project to define a new wallet protocol addressing problems with the current JSON-RPC implementation in bitcoind. This protocol aims to be a standard for communication between Wallets and User Interfaces15 KB (2,054 words) - 03:35, 20 August 2011
- ...y:Clients|client]] built using Python 3 and implements the Bitcoin network protocol. ...cointalk.org/index.php?topic=4084.0 Announcing Pycoin, a (partial) bitcoin protocol implementation in python3]</ref>583 bytes (70 words) - 18:46, 19 February 2012
- The wiki substantially documents the [[Protocol_specification|Bitcoin protocol]], but equally important are the rules used by the client to process messag * [[Protocol specification]]12 KB (1,987 words) - 10:29, 23 June 2020
- ...e "transaction" described using [http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/ Google protocol buffers] syntax. ...odebase. It can be written in whatever language you like, use whatever P2P protocol you like, store its data however you like and so on.24 KB (3,974 words) - 19:05, 7 June 2017
- It has mostly been superceded by the newer [[getblocktemplate]] mining protocol, but the data format is still often used internal to some miner structures. ==Protocol==10 KB (1,545 words) - 03:00, 1 April 2015
- ...want to destroy their bitcoins. But what is a problem is that the Bitcoin protocol has no way to determine that the bitcoins spent to pseudo-hashes are imposs ...hes than in an OP_RETURN output. So it would still be nice if the Bitcoin protocol could otherwise discourage people from storing data in hash fields.11 KB (1,738 words) - 07:11, 6 January 2018
- ...r its processes or environment. The BIP should provide a concise technical specification of the feature and a rationale for the feature. ...fects most or all Bitcoin implementations, such as a change to the network protocol, a change in block or transaction validity rules, or any change or addition16 KB (2,623 words) - 10:02, 1 January 2021
- | 2 || bcdUSB || 2 || 0100h || USB specification release number in binary coded decimal. | 7 || bInterfaceProtocol || 1 || 01h || Runtime protocol.4 KB (507 words) - 03:13, 8 January 2016
- When receiving an Aux proof-of-work block in a [[Protocol specification#block|"<tt>block</tt>" network message]], the data received is similar to a | ? || coinbase_txn || [[Protocol specification#tx|txn]] || Coinbase transaction that is in the parent block, [[#Merged min17 KB (2,390 words) - 12:31, 8 August 2015
- [[bip-0070.mediawiki|BIP 0070]] (payment protocol) may be seen as the alternative to Aliases. ...areful argument, a bitcoin alias system. This is a big modification to the protocol that is not easily changed in the future and has big ramifications. There i19 KB (2,806 words) - 21:51, 30 April 2024
- This BIP describes a change to the p2p protocol to allow a node to tell a peer ==Specification==6 KB (903 words) - 15:33, 5 May 2022
- ==Specification== ...a specific implementation and does not deprecate scriptPubKey to maintain protocol consistency.9 KB (1,269 words) - 17:58, 24 September 2019
- This document describes a trivial protocol extension that makes it easier for clients to detect dead peer connections. All of these can be solved by a backwards compatible protocol modification.3 KB (473 words) - 17:59, 24 September 2019
- == Specification == ...blockchain services. This proposal deals with that issue by designing this protocol in such a way that the implementation can resolve the common history betwee7 KB (1,007 words) - 07:56, 2 August 2020
- Title: Protocol for Dedicated Mining Hardware ==Specification==7 KB (981 words) - 20:27, 14 July 2012
- Title: Abstract JTAG Protocol ==Specification==6 KB (928 words) - 21:03, 4 August 2012
- ==Specification== Note that all sections of this specification are optional extensions on top of [[bip-0022.mediawiki|BIP 22]].14 KB (2,058 words) - 18:00, 24 September 2019
- ==Specification== ...to directly contact a large number of miners using a best-effort datagram protocol (specifically, UDP), send them their transaction, and in return, receive a9 KB (1,505 words) - 04:40, 1 August 2012
- ==Specification== ## Protocol version >= 600022 KB (241 words) - 20:16, 30 April 2024
- ...nd support for custom transports. However, without a general framework for protocol extensions, these custom services are likely to collide in various ways. Th ==Specification==10 KB (1,423 words) - 07:38, 2 August 2020
- getblocktemplate is the new decentralized Bitcoin mining protocol, openly developed by the Bitcoin community over mid 2012. It supercedes the old [[getwork]] mining protocol.15 KB (2,134 words) - 02:01, 26 March 2019
- ...y:Clients|client]] built using Python 2 and implements the Bitcoin network protocol. * [[Protocol specification|Bitcoin Network Protocol]]581 bytes (72 words) - 01:00, 26 September 2012
- This BIP adds new support to the peer-to-peer protocol that allows peers to reduce the amount of transaction data they are sent. P ==Specification==17 KB (2,887 words) - 18:00, 24 September 2019
- == Specification == See [[BIP 0070]] for the current specification.1 KB (144 words) - 12:06, 10 February 2015
- On connect, [[Protocol specification#version|version]] and [[Protocol specification#verack|verack]] messages are exchanged, in order to ensure compatibility be682 bytes (109 words) - 15:44, 27 August 2018
- The Bitcoin [[Protocol specification]] previously supported the broadcast of [[Alerts]]. In the past, an unoffic2 KB (227 words) - 13:15, 6 January 2018
- * Disallow small value orders, see [[Prime Specification|Performance]] settings in admin panel ===Correct use of HTTP protocol===8 KB (1,182 words) - 22:35, 20 April 2013
- * lock_time in [[Protocol_specification#tx|the protocol specification]]2 KB (320 words) - 07:15, 17 February 2022
- The protocol version was upgraded to 70001, and the (now accepted) BIP 0037 became imple ...ict adherence to standard messages with field length compliance with every protocol version.4 KB (607 words) - 21:22, 23 April 2024
- ...All Type-1 SINs must conform to the sacrifice protocol described in this specification, to be considered valid. ...it_Sacrifices Announce/Commit Sacrifices]. That author's feedback on this protocol was very helpful.6 KB (890 words) - 04:50, 14 May 2015
- Title: Payment Protocol This BIP describes a protocol for communication between a merchant and their customer, enabling16 KB (2,318 words) - 00:27, 1 October 2022
- Title: Payment Protocol MIME types Wallet or server software that sends payment protocol messages over1 KB (145 words) - 18:00, 24 September 2019
- Title: bitcoin: uri extensions for Payment Protocol support the payment protocol (BIP 70).2 KB (375 words) - 18:00, 24 September 2019
- This BIP describes an enhancement to the payment protocol ([[bip-0070.mediawiki|BIP 70]]) generalizes the specification for the behavior of a payment request URL in a4 KB (686 words) - 17:59, 24 September 2019
- == [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=120184.msg1294416#msg1294416 Chip Specification] == ...er's performance, it is recommended that you choose pools with the stratum protocol supported. The default mining pool configured in Avalon is ozco.in. To chan29 KB (4,203 words) - 22:45, 13 April 2015
- ...ng code, so it is [https://github.com/Colored-Coins/Colored-Coins-Protocol-Specification/wiki/Faq#coloring-satoshis no longer the only case] that individual satoshi ==The EPOBC protocol==15 KB (2,058 words) - 01:44, 13 May 2020
- ...to support pooled mining as a replacement for obsolete [[Getwork|getwork]] protocol in late 2012. ...site<ref>[http://mining.bitcoin.cz/stratum-mining/ Stratum mining protocol specification at slush's pool's website]</ref>.8 KB (1,147 words) - 05:29, 10 October 2015
- The PayPub protocol makes it possible to pay for information in a trustless way ==Detailed Specification==13 KB (1,845 words) - 17:59, 24 September 2019
- why they are being banned for not following the protocol helps ==Specification==5 KB (662 words) - 21:45, 30 April 2024
- This document describes a small P2P protocol extension that performs UTXO lookups given a set of outpoints. SPV wallet. This use case requires some other changes to the Bitcoin protocol however, so we will5 KB (844 words) - 07:47, 2 August 2020
- A Bitcoin ASIC's specification could be seen as having a certain [[hash per second|hash rate]] (e.g. Gh/s) ...expensive than for another ASIC. If the ASIC has a complex communications protocol, additional relatively expensive components may be required. If an ASIC's8 KB (1,229 words) - 00:26, 24 April 2019
- The specification defines the layers and sets forth specific criteria for deciding to which l ==Specification==16 KB (1,847 words) - 18:00, 24 September 2019
- ==Specification== # Feature discovery is enabled by checking protocol version >= 700123 KB (429 words) - 18:00, 24 September 2019
- == Specification == ..., since sequence number of ffffffff would make lock_time ineffective. This specification demands that all input sequence numbers are 0, not just one of them, which9 KB (1,453 words) - 17:59, 24 September 2019
- explicitly. It also bumps the protocol version to allow peers to == Specification ==3 KB (518 words) - 18:00, 24 September 2019
- ==Specification== This is a hard-forking change to the Bitcoin protocol; anybody running code that fully validates blocks must upgrade before the a5 KB (736 words) - 07:39, 2 August 2020
- A method of altering the maximum allowed block size of the Bitcoin protocol limit is required at protocol level. This feature ensures full nodes retain4 KB (681 words) - 07:37, 2 August 2020
- ==Specification== In the event that future protocol upgrades introduce new signature hash types, compliant software should appl12 KB (1,826 words) - 16:03, 15 December 2021
- ==Specification== ...ctivation is achieved, the maximum block size shall be as described in the specification section, regardless of the version number of the block.10 KB (1,479 words) - 17:59, 24 September 2019
- ==== Using USB-DFU Protocol ==== | 2 || bcdUSB || 2 || 0100h || USB specification release number in binary coded decimal.22 KB (3,104 words) - 07:59, 15 August 2016
- ...ation: [https://github.com/chromaway/ngcccbase/wiki/EPOBC_simple The EPOBC protocol] which allows you to store assets on the [[http://chromawallet.com|Bitcoin ...nting the [https://github.com/chromaway/ngcccbase/wiki/EPOBC_simple EPOBC] protocol.2 KB (278 words) - 14:53, 2 November 2015
- ...r its processes or environment. The BIP should provide a concise technical specification of the feature and a rationale for the feature. ...d implementation, if applicable, must be solid and must not complicate the protocol unduly.34 KB (5,496 words) - 20:07, 24 April 2024
- * (15 Feb 2021) Finalize specification ...e payment codes, however future developments of the reusable payment codes specification will not be distributed via the BIP process.22 KB (3,425 words) - 18:29, 24 April 2024
- Title: Allow zero value OP_RETURN in Payment Protocol This BIP alters the Payment Protocol to allow for zero value OP_RETURN outputs in serialized PaymentRequests.6 KB (975 words) - 17:59, 24 September 2019
- ...n libsecp256k1 after #REPLACE_libsecp256k1_PR), it is still not a complete specification of the consensus rules. Since libconsensus doesn't manage the current state that there's many alternative implementations of the protocol (forks18 KB (2,863 words) - 21:58, 30 April 2024
- ==Specification== ...posal]], as a safe runway prior to switching to Phase 2, while network and protocol infrastructure is improved6 KB (909 words) - 07:50, 2 August 2020
- == Specification == The use of normalized transaction IDs is introduced as a softfork. The specification is divided into three parts:15 KB (2,249 words) - 07:56, 2 August 2020
- ...' by moving part of the transaction data to a structure unknown to current protocol, for example: ==Specification==26 KB (3,935 words) - 23:08, 26 April 2024
- == Specification == *BIP70 Payment protocol6 KB (918 words) - 17:58, 24 September 2019
- ==Specification== A new serialization format for tx messages is added to the peer-to-peer protocol.5 KB (805 words) - 18:00, 24 September 2019
- ==Specification== ...r [[bip-0141.mediawiki#Commitment_structure|BIP 141's commitment structure specification]] to be inserted into the generation (coinbase) transaction.6 KB (867 words) - 18:00, 24 September 2019
- Peer-to-peer protocol messages enabling nodes to request and relay the unconfirmed ancestor packa * [https://github.com/ElementsProject/peerswap/blob/master/docs/peer-protocol.md#claim-transaction Claim Transactions in PeerSwap]28 KB (4,234 words) - 18:44, 24 April 2024
- The most widely adopted PayJoin protocol standard is [[BIP 0078]]. Bitcoin casinos are very natural early-adopters of PayJoin. An early protocol specification for it, called bustapay, was created by the owner of a bitcoin casino.11 KB (1,371 words) - 04:00, 27 January 2024
- ...hers' behalf even if it would not sign actual transactions. No signmessage protocol can fix these limitations. Full signatures follow an analogous specification to the BIP-325 challenges and solutions used by Signet.11 KB (1,659 words) - 14:18, 1 May 2024
- Title: Bustapay :: a practical coinjoin protocol Bustapay is a simple and practical protocol for the sender and receiver of a payment to collaboratively sign a bitcoin12 KB (1,820 words) - 21:21, 12 February 2021
- Title: Pay to Contract Protocol ...col using homomorphic payment addresses and the multiparty pay-to-contract protocol.11 KB (1,541 words) - 21:25, 12 February 2021
- This protocol upgrade cleans up past soft fork changes like BIP68 which Next to that this protocol upgrade will re-order the data-fields which12 KB (1,921 words) - 17:03, 21 August 2020
- ...us input script transaction''': A HIT created as part of a user protection protocol for reducing uncontrolled disclosure of personally-identifying information In order to achieve these goals, this specification proposes a set of best practices for heterogeneous input script transaction8 KB (1,197 words) - 21:47, 30 April 2024
- The Bitcoin protocol requires a flexible scheme for finding consensus on protocol changes, to ensure that it can adapt to the needs of the market and18 KB (2,726 words) - 10:06, 1 January 2021
- ==Specification== # Feature discovery is enabled by checking protocol version >= 700134 KB (646 words) - 23:25, 1 May 2024
- BIP 157 light client protocol<ref>bip-0157.mediawiki</ref>. The filter [[bip-0157.mediawiki|BIP 157]] defines a light client protocol based on16 KB (2,523 words) - 00:32, 9 May 2024
- ...rst version of Bitcoin, '''TxID'''s have been a core part of the consensus protocol and are routinely used to identify individual transactions between users. == Specification ==30 KB (4,018 words) - 15:52, 15 December 2021
- Bitcoin's transaction spreading protocol is vulnerable to deanonymization Dandelion). We have shown that this routing protocol provides near-optimal17 KB (2,524 words) - 07:48, 2 August 2020
- ==Specification== This specification does not reserve specific bits for specific purposes.4 KB (549 words) - 17:59, 24 September 2019
- ==Specification== ...ning only be used to specify the structure of the witness, however no such protocol exists as of yet. Using the NOP-expansion space prevents MERKLEBRANCHVERIFY11 KB (1,767 words) - 17:59, 24 September 2019
- ==Specification== Our specification consists of two parts:11 KB (1,592 words) - 21:35, 30 April 2024
- This BIP describes a new light client protocol in Bitcoin that improves upon currently available options. The standard light client protocol in use today,21 KB (3,233 words) - 15:55, 15 December 2021
- ==Specification== ===Network protocol===9 KB (1,468 words) - 17:10, 21 August 2020
- Title: Stratum protocol extensions This BIP provides a generic mechanism for specifying stratum protocol12 KB (1,756 words) - 23:18, 1 May 2024
- ...etwork run by hobbyists to a global currency, the underlying Proof of Work protocol has not been updated. Initially pitched as a global decentralized network ( == Specification ==22 KB (3,346 words) - 19:40, 16 January 2022
- ...ptofees.info/ cryptofees.info], 15x more txn fees are paid outside the BTC protocol, than within it. ==Specification==19 KB (3,040 words) - 21:44, 23 April 2024
- Historically, the Bitcoin P2P protocol has not been very bandwidth efficient for block relay. Every transaction in ==Specification for version 1==30 KB (4,803 words) - 21:36, 23 April 2024
- == Specification == The protocol may be slow if a peer has a large authorized-peers database due to the requ10 KB (1,384 words) - 18:00, 24 September 2019
- == Specification == ...gnature replay cannot cause loss of funds (eg due to other features of the protocol or other constraints on the transaction), or when such a loss of funds is a20 KB (3,134 words) - 23:13, 29 September 2022
- This document specifies a P2P protocol extension for reconciliation of transaction announcements <b>between 2 node A <b>reconciliation-based protocol</b> which uses the technique suggested in this document can have better sca21 KB (3,293 words) - 21:48, 23 April 2024
- ...lly not a requirement for digital signature schemes, and the lack of exact specification for the DER parsing of ECDSA signatures has caused problems for Bitcoin [ht ...shes''' Cryptographic hash functions are used for multiple purposes in the specification below and in Bitcoin in general. To make sure hashes used in one context ca39 KB (6,291 words) - 17:37, 6 May 2024
- == Specification == The MSDL-pop protocol requires all parties to provide a proof of possession of their correspondin43 KB (6,814 words) - 18:04, 29 June 2023
- ==Specification== ...termination. This was one of a major design flaws in the original bitcoin protocol as it permitted unconditional third party theft by placing an <code>OP_RETU24 KB (3,690 words) - 02:50, 27 February 2023
- ==Detailed Specification== in pythonic pseudocode. The canonical specification for the semantics of36 KB (5,382 words) - 18:43, 23 April 2024
- This BIP describes two changes to the p2p protocol to support transaction relay ==Specification==3 KB (490 words) - 17:17, 21 August 2020