Suggest to rename the term “tx nonce” to “tx counter”

[dahlia]

Currently every account has its own tx nonce and every time an account signs a new transaction a transaction has its nonce which matches to (1 + its signer's tx nonce) to avoid replay attack (see: #125). It has to be increased by only 1 so that a transaction's nonce refers to the number of how many prior transactions were signed by the same signer. The problem is that it's no more random nor arbitrary, which is counterintuitive to many people presume on the concept of cryptographic nonce.

So I suggest to rename it to tx counter instead. Request for comments.

[baumstern]

+1.

It seems to me that the term nonce is used generally in some cases like stateless protocol (i.e. user authentification). Arbitrary value in temporary would just enough to achieve uniqueness of message in this context. Using this term in stateful account model may confuse people because replay attack is prevented by order of transaction rather than arbitrary value.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. Thank you for your contributions.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. Thank you for your contributions.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. Thank you for your contributions.

[OnedgeLee]

Has this issue been discussed?
Seems a bit weird, hacktoberfest label is attached, it's only suggestion though.