public inbox for
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Calvin Kim <ccychc@gmail•com>
To: Bitcoin Development Mailing List <>
Subject: [bitcoindev] Re: The Future of Bitcoin Testnet
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 01:14:21 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2929 bytes --]

Throwing myself into the conversation because I think there's other devs 
that use testnet like I do.
I mainly use testnet for checking if the utreexod implementation I'm 
building runs into consensus
bugs due to the havoc of how testnet creates bursts of blocks and how it 
reorganizes itself. I find
the unpredictability a feature.

> 1. Testnet3 has been running for 13 years. It's on block 2.5 million 
something and the block reward is down to ~0.014 TBTC, so mining is not 
doing a great job at distributing testnet coins any more.

For my usage I never really see this as a problem since signet already 
provides that usecase. While
I can empathize with devs struggling to get coins, there's always signet 
for the usecase of testing
scripts/wallets. Signet doesn't really provide the same feature for my 

> 2. The reason the block height is insanely high is due to a rather 
amusing edge case bug that causes the difficulty to regularly get reset to 
1, which causes a bit of havoc. If you want a deep dive into the quirk:

I stated this above but I find this as a feature.

> 3. Testnet3 is being actively used for scammy airdrops; those of us who 
tend to be generous with our testnet coins are getting hounded by 
non-developers chasing cheap gains.

Could I get links/sources for this? I'm curious as to how big of a problem 
this is.

> 4. As a result, TBTC is being actively bought and sold; one could argue 
that the fundamental principle of testnet coins having no value has been 

Same for this. Would appreciate links/evidence.

> 1. Should we plan for a reset of testnet? If so, given how long it has 
been since the last reset and how many production systems will need to be 
updated, would a reset need to be done with a great deal of notice?

I lean towards no unless the problem with testnet coins being valued is too 

> 2. Is there interest in fixing the difficulty reset bug? It should be a 
one liner fix, and I'd argue it could be done sooner rather than later, and 
orthogonal to the network reset question. Would such a change, which would 
technically be a hard fork (but also arguably a self resolving fork due to 
the difficulty dynamics) necessitate a BIP or could we just YOLO it?

Again, I'd lean towards keeping it the same.

> 3. Is all of the above a waste of time and we should instead deprecate 
testnet in favor of signet?

No as signet doesn't have the features I find valuable in testnet.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
To view this discussion on the web visit

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 4006 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-04-04  8:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-31 13:19 [bitcoindev] " Jameson Lopp
2024-03-31 14:33 ` Luke Dashjr
2024-03-31 14:57   ` Jameson Lopp
2024-03-31 17:21     ` Eric Voskuil
2024-04-09 18:28   ` Garlo Nicon
2024-03-31 16:02 ` Peter Todd
2024-03-31 21:01   ` Nagaev Boris
2024-03-31 21:29     ` Peter Todd
2024-04-01 12:54       ` Jameson Lopp
2024-04-01 13:37         ` Pieter Wuille
2024-04-01 14:20           ` Andrew Poelstra
2024-04-01 22:01             ` 'Fabian' via Bitcoin Development Mailing List
2024-04-02 11:53               ` Jameson Lopp
2024-04-02 18:36                 ` Lukáš Kráľ
2024-04-02 19:46                   ` Jameson Lopp
2024-04-03  4:19           ` Anthony Towns
2024-04-03 18:18             ` emsit
2024-04-03 19:35               ` Andrew Poelstra
2024-04-30 18:46               ` Matthew Bagazinski
2024-05-01 15:30                 ` Garlo Nicon
2024-05-04 17:13                 ` Peter Todd
2024-04-10  6:57       ` Garlo Nicon
2024-04-22  4:33         ` Ali Sherief
2024-04-01 13:25 ` Andrew Poelstra
2024-04-01 13:32   ` 'Fabian' via Bitcoin Development Mailing List
2024-04-01 14:28 ` Warren Togami
2024-04-01 19:22 ` [bitcoindev] " emsit
2024-04-04  8:14 ` Calvin Kim [this message]
2024-04-04 12:47   ` Jameson Lopp
2024-04-05  4:30     ` Calvin Kim
2024-04-06 23:04       ` David A. Harding
2024-04-09 16:48         ` Peter Todd
2024-04-16 17:30           ` [bitcoindev] " 'Sjors Provoost' via Bitcoin Development Mailing List
2024-04-07  7:20   ` [bitcoindev] " Christian Decker
2024-04-07  8:09     ` K Calvin
2024-04-08 19:11 ` Garlo Nicon
2024-04-09  4:29   ` coinableS
2024-04-28 13:45 ` [bitcoindev] " Matt Corallo
2024-05-02  7:10   ` Ali Sherief
2024-05-04 17:08     ` Peter Todd

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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \
    --to=ccychc@gmail$(echo .)com \ \
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