From: Mark Friedenbach <mark@monetize•io>
To: Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr•org>
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net"
<bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.8.1 ideas
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 10:41:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACh7GpE09hqCPL6rtdC6EZzohM5QHb+0SdFoD8MzPSqf7=6hOA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201303131256.30144.luke@dashjr.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2852 bytes --]
I'm not sure I understand the need for hard forks. We can get through this
crisis by mining pool collusion to prevent forking blocks until there is
widespread adoption of patched clients.
Proposal:
1) Patch the pre-0.8 branches to support an increased lock count, whatever
number is required to make sure that this problem never shows up again at
the current block size (I defer to Luke-Jr and gmaxwell's numbers on this).
2) Patch all branches to not *generate* blocks which trigger the lock count
limit. A larger block would still be accepted as valid, however, if it is
on the longest chain.
3) Simultaneously, provide an additional non-standard patch to mining pool
operators (>>50% network hash) *rejecting* blocks that trigger the lock
count limit. This keeps miners in collusion with each other to stay on a
'compatibility fork'.
4) At some point in the future once we've crossed an acceptable adoption
threshold, the miners remove the above patch in a coordinated way.
Does that not get us past this crisis without a hard-fork?
Mark
(Aside: I'm for BOTH raising the block-size limit and off-chain
transactions, but like it or not there are political sides to that debate
and we should keep politics out of crisis management.)
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr•org> wrote:
> Here's a simple proposal to start discussion from...
>
> BEFORE block 262144:
> - Never make a block that, combined with the previous 4 blocks, results in
> over 4500 transaction modifications.
> - Reject any block that includes more than 4500 transaction modifications
> on
> its own (slight soft-fork)
> - (these rules should make older clients safe under most circumstances)
>
> FROM block 262144 to block 393216 (hard fork #1):
> - Never make, and reject any block that includes more than 24391
> transaction
> modifications on its own (this *should* be equivalent to 1 MB)
> - (this rules can make older client backports safe unless a reorg is more
> than
> 6 blocks deep)
>
> FROM block 393216 onward (hard fork #2):
> - Never make, and reject any block that includes more than 48781
> transaction
> modifications on its own (this *should* be equivalent to 2 MB)
> - Accept blocks up to 2 MB in data size
> - Discontinue support for clients prior to 0.8.1
>
> I intentionally set the block numbers conservatively to try to account for
> the
> yet-unseen ASIC upgrade.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3585 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-13 17:48 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 [this message]
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
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='CACh7GpE09hqCPL6rtdC6EZzohM5QHb+0SdFoD8MzPSqf7=6hOA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=mark@monetize$(echo .)io \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=luke@dashjr$(echo .)org \
/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