On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

What problem am I missing if we just mask of the offending bits. For my own project which uses auxpow (and thus has weird nVersion), I also used the bitmasking method to get rid of auxpow version bits before making the standard integer comparisons to deploy BIP66 using IsSuperMajority():

    if ((block.nVersion & 0xff) >= 4 && CBlockIndex::IsSuperMajority(...)) { //...}

What if version number 257 is used in the future?  That would appear to be a version 1 block and fail the test.