From: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail•com>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Blockchain verification flag (BIP draft)
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 20:47:01 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADvTj4q_Ubrk6a15Q4uB3MT0PHGnvZt3yPMOWCdPhWf_WGH-tA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <871tb16diz.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1702 bytes --]
I think something that anyone who isn't validating should be aware of is
that cgminer(which powers the vast majority of the current mining network)
doesn't allow for a pool to revert to mining on the previous block due to
the way chain tracking is implemented.
https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/blob/master/cgminer.c#L4727
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
> writes:
> > Overall, good idea.
> >
> > Is there a write-up somewhere describing in detail the 'accidental
> selfish
> > mining' problem that this mitigates? I think a link in the BIP to a
> fuller
> > description of the problem and how validation-skipping makes it go away
> > would be helpful.
> >
> > RE: which bit to use: the draft versionbits BIP and BIP101 use bit 30;
> to
> > avoid confusion, I think it would be better to use bit 0.
>
> Yes, BIP9 need to be adjusted (setting bit 30 means BIP9 counts it as a
> vote against all softforks). BIP101 uses bits 0,1,2 AFAICT, so perhaps
> start from the other end and use bit 29? We can bikeshed that later
> though...
>
> > I agree with Jannes Faber, behavior with respect to SPV clients should be
> > to only tell them about fully validated headers.
>
> A delicate balance. If we penalize these blocks too much, it's
> disincentive to set the bit. Fortunately it's easy for SPV clients to
> decide for themselves, I think?
>
> Cheers,
> Rusty.
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2575 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-06 2:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-04 8:26 Gregory Maxwell
2015-12-04 12:44 ` Jannes Faber
2015-12-04 16:46 ` Thomas Kerin
2015-12-04 17:34 ` Gavin Andresen
2015-12-04 22:43 ` Rusty Russell
2015-12-06 2:47 ` James Hilliard [this message]
2015-12-06 6:26 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-12-06 5:13 ` 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=CADvTj4q_Ubrk6a15Q4uB3MT0PHGnvZt3yPMOWCdPhWf_WGH-tA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=james.hilliard1@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.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