From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr•org>
To: Mark Friedenbach <mark@monetize•io>
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net"
<bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.8.1 ideas
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 20:18:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201303132018.24649.luke@dashjr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACh7GpG_4uLUUiwJyZO0FtV2_UHMN-HnJsZZXWpC2jQvzb-jMQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 6:27:13 PM Mark Friedenbach wrote:
> Luke-Jr is suggesting that we add-to/modify the bitcoin protocol rules
> which all verifying implementations must adhere to. I'm suggesting that we
> instead change the old codebase to do what we expected it to do all along
> (what 0.8 does and what every other verifying implementation does), and
> through miner collusion buy ourselves enough time for people to update
> their own installations.
Curiously enough, at least MtGox's custom implementation stuck with the
canonical blockchain despite 0.8's accidental rule change.
> I know there's people here who will jump in saying that the bitcoin
> protocol is the behavior of the Satoshi client, period. But which Satoshi
> client? 0.7 or 0.8? How do you resolve that without being arbitrary? And
> regardless, we are moving very quickly towards a multi-client future. This
> problem is very clearly a *bug* in the old codebase. So let's be forward
> thinking and do what we would do in any other situation: fix the bug,
> responsibly notify people and give them time to react, then move on. Let's
> not codify the bug in the protocol.
No, if any other client released diverged from the consensus of all
past/existing clients, we would do the same thing: call it a formerly unknown
protocol rule, that this new client has a bug implementing, and be done with
it.
The only reason this particular issue needs special treatment is because the
implications of the new rule mean that we're up against a hard limit in the
protocol today rather than 2 years from now.
Luke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-13 20:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-13 12:56 Luke-Jr
2013-03-13 13:14 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-03-13 15:05 ` Peter Todd
2013-03-13 15:18 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-03-13 15:26 ` Luke-Jr
2013-03-13 16:04 ` Peter Todd
2013-03-13 17:41 ` Mark Friedenbach
2013-03-13 17:58 ` Pieter Wuille
2013-03-13 18:27 ` Mark Friedenbach
2013-03-13 18:35 ` slush
2013-03-13 18:38 ` Pieter Wuille
2013-03-13 19:30 ` Gregory Maxwell
[not found] ` <16B6728E-4220-4DA6-B740-FA38A7C19CCB@thelibertyportal.com>
2013-03-13 20:24 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-03-13 20:18 ` Luke-Jr [this message]
2013-03-13 18:04 ` Luke-Jr
2013-03-13 21:06 ` Andy Parkins
2013-03-13 21:14 ` Luke-Jr
2013-03-13 21:22 ` Roy Badami
2013-03-13 21:27 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-03-13 21:36 ` Roy Badami
2013-03-14 0:18 ` Cameron Garnham
2013-03-15 17:06 ` Benjamin Lindner
2013-03-15 19:23 ` Luke-Jr
2013-03-15 19:52 ` Gregory Maxwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201303132018.24649.luke@dashjr.org \
--to=luke@dashjr$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=mark@monetize$(echo .)io \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox