From: Matt Corallo <lf-lists@mattcorallo•com>
To: Russell O'Connor <roconnor@blockstream•com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Making the case for flag day activation of taproot
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 17:14:10 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4947b02e-90fb-9044-4552-767de805ff14@mattcorallo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMZUoKkWmdwi-VH3WUvFfG+5MDK3xhvZUac3eBQbxXX_b_btWw@mail.gmail.com>
On 3/3/21 14:08, Russell O'Connor via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> While I support essentially any proposed taproot activation method, including a flag day activation, I think it is
> premature to call BIP8 dead.
>
> Even today, I still think that starting with BIP8 LOT=false is, generally speaking, considered a reasonably safe
> activation method in the sense that I think it will be widely considered as a "not wholly unacceptable" approach to
> activation.
How do you propose avoiding divergent consensus rules on the network, something which a number of commentors on this
list have publicly committed to?
> After a normal and successful Core update with LOT=false, we will have more data showing broad community support for the
> taproot upgrade in hand.
I think this is one of the strongest arguments against a flag day activation, but, as I described in more detail in the
thread "Straight Flag Day (Height) Taproot Activation", I'm not sure we aren't there enough already.
> In the next release, 6 months later or so, Core could then confidently deploy a BIP8 LOT=true
Could you clarify what an acceptable timeline is, then? Six months from release of new consensus rules to activation (in
the case of a one-year original window) seems incredibly agressive for a flag-day activation, let alone one with
forced-signaling, which would require significantly higher level of adoption to avoid network split risk. In such a
world, we'd probably get Taproot faster with a flag day from day one.
> client, should it prove to be necessary. A second Core deployment of LOT=true would mitigate some of the concerns with
> LOT=false, but still provide a period beforehand to objective actions taken by the community in support of taproot. We
> don't even have to have agreement today on a second deployment of LOT=true after 6 months to start the process of a
> LOT=false deployment. The later deployment will almost certainly be moot, and we will have 6 months to spend debating
> the LOT=true deployment versus doing a flag day activation or something else.
That was precisely the original goal with the LOT=false movement - do something easy and avoid having to hash out all
the technical details of a second deployment. Sadly, that's no longer tennable as a number of people are publicly
committed to deploying LOT=true software on the network ASAP.
Matt
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-03 22:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-03 14:39 Chris Belcher
2021-03-03 16:19 ` Vincent Truong
2021-03-04 23:45 ` Eric Voskuil
2021-03-03 17:30 ` yanmaani
2021-03-03 20:48 ` Chris Belcher
2021-03-03 21:39 ` yanmaani
2021-03-03 19:08 ` Russell O'Connor
2021-03-03 22:14 ` Matt Corallo [this message]
2021-03-04 13:47 ` Russell O'Connor
2021-03-04 18:23 ` Keagan McClelland
2021-03-05 14:51 ` Ryan Grant
2021-03-05 18:17 ` Luke Dashjr
2021-03-06 17:57 ` Matt Corallo
2021-03-29 9:17 ` Anthony Towns
[not found] <mailman.66954.1614808879.32591.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
2021-03-03 22:12 ` Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
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=4947b02e-90fb-9044-4552-767de805ff14@mattcorallo.com \
--to=lf-lists@mattcorallo$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=roconnor@blockstream$(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