segregated witness – Does including OP_1 to scriptSig create a fork between non-segWit and segWit nodes?

0
56


In response to this, when the scriptPubKey equals to:

OP_n (with n between 0 and 16, inclusive) adopted by a direct push of precisely 2 to 40 bytes inclusive

… it denotes the beginning of SegWit validating course of. SegWit validation course of embrace the checking whether or not the scriptSig is an empty discipline. Whether it is, outdated nodes (non-segWit) will robotically settle for this as a sound script since after the “concatenation” (I do know it is not an actual concatenation) the top-most ingredient within the stack will likely be non-zero, whereas the segWit nodes will go into additional checking.

So, my query is: what is going to occur if somebody simply add OP_1 in scriptSig? I imply, for non-segWit nodes it could nonetheless be accepted as
a sound script since top-most ingredient within the stack is non-zero, and for segWit nodes it’s going to thought-about as invalid since scriptSig just isn’t an empty discipline. Will this make some form of fork? How is that this resolved?

Further query is what is going to occur if non-segWit nodes settle for some “segWit” transaction as legitimate since top-most merchandise is non-zero, and segWit however don’t settle for that transaction since one thing in its witness knowledge just isn’t okay? What is going on on this case, how is that this resolved?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here