From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP: Using Median time-past as endpoint for locktime calculations
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 16:19:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150827231913.GC4125@muck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADJgMztcy33cW4=SOfsmANMFCU3Q7pcLqatG9JeJCgEXnpkD+g@mail.gmail.com> <CADJgMzvfeka5WXyjz8oeTtKUSrfxWBGR7BMujJ-4LL2jrcUuZw@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1917 bytes --]
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:08:32PM +0100, Btc Drak wrote:
> This BIP was assigned number 113.
>
> I have updated the text accordingly and added credits to Gregory Maxwell.
>
> Please see the changes in the pull request:
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/182
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:11:10PM +0100, Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I have changed BIPS 112 and 113 to reflect this amended deployment
> strategy. I'm beginning to think the issues created by Bitcoin XT are
> so serious it probably deserves converting OPs text into an
> informational BIP.
I thought we had decided that the masking thing doesn't work as
intended?
To recap, XT nodes are producing blocks with nVersion=0b001...111
You're suggesting that we apply a mask of ~0b001...111 then trigger the
soft-fork on nVersion >= 0b0...100 == 4, with miners producing blocks with
nVersion=0b0...1000
That will work, but it still uses up a version bit. The reason why is
blocks with nVersion=0b001...000 - the intended deployment of the
nVersion bits proposal - will be rejected by the nVersion >= 4 rule,
hard-forking them off the network. In short, we have in fact "burnt" a
version bit unnecessarily.
If you're going to accept hard-forking some people off the network, why
not just go with my stateless nVersion bits w/ time-expiration proposal
instead? The only case where it leads to a hard-fork is if a soft-fork
has been rejected by the time the upgrade deadline is reached. It's easy
to set this multiple years into the future, so I think in practice it
won't be a major issue for non-controversial soft-forks.
Equally, spending the time to implement the original stateful nVersion
bits proposal is possible as well, though higher risk due to the extra
complexity of tracking soft-fork state.
--
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000000008ba8215b2b644e33a98a762fd40710bc5e8c7f1b0e78375
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 650 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-27 23:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-18 1:22 Thomas Kerin
2015-08-19 1:04 ` Peter Todd
2015-08-19 1:08 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-21 11:13 ` Thomas Kerin
2015-08-22 0:57 ` Peter Todd
2015-08-27 22:08 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-27 23:19 ` Peter Todd [this message]
2015-08-28 15:27 ` jl2012
2015-08-19 5:50 [bitcoin-dev] CLTV/CSV/etc. deployment considerations due to XT/Not-BitcoinXT miners Peter Todd
2015-08-19 6:10 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-19 9:34 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-19 10:20 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-19 10:31 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-19 13:15 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-19 13:24 ` Tier Nolan
2015-08-19 17:25 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-19 18:17 ` Tier Nolan
2015-08-19 12:36 ` Matt Corallo
2015-08-19 13:22 ` Tier Nolan
2015-08-19 14:01 ` Jeff Garzik
2015-08-19 16:32 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-19 21:03 ` Peter Todd
2015-08-20 17:32 ` jl2012
2015-08-20 17:42 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-27 22:11 ` Btc Drak
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=20150827231913.GC4125@muck \
--to=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=btcdrak@gmail$(echo .)com \
/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