public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Sacco <johnsock@gmail•com>
To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail•com>, Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr•org>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - Block size doubles at each reward halving with max block size of 32M
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 04:50:47 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEkt4XvGzkFipDwqD_m+56+vWxRaF+rRy8ydJJ7tqibcyjWJ0g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADJgMzu+69bMP4mJZ4pUA1JLc8GXaUQfORGzTDivnLwQ8Zw9+A@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5410 bytes --]

Revised spec below to put us back at 2 MB at next halving in 2016
(addressing Luke & Drak's points). This is more in line with intent of the
original proposal and provides sufficient time to gain consensus.

Specification
>
>
> * 2 MB, height 420,000 < 630,000; (fork active when 75% of last 1,000
blocks signal support and block 420,000 reached, ~July 2016)


* 4 MB, height 630,000 < 840,000; (year ~2020)


* 8 MB, height 840,000 < 1,050,000; (year ~2024)


* 16 MB, height 1,050,000 < 1,260,000; (year ~2028)


* 32 MB, height >= 1,260,000. (year ~2032)




On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 2:49 AM, Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail•com> wrote:

> > * 2 MB, height 210,000 < 420,000; (when 75% of last 1,000 blocks signal
> support)
>
> This doesnt give anyone a chance to upgrade and would cause a hard fork
> the moment a miner created a >1MB block. Flag day (hard fork) upgrades must
> start the change at a sufficient time in the future (greater than the
> current block height) to give all nodes the chance to upgrade.
>
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 3:37 AM, John Sacco via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> I like your suggestion for the continuity and it gets us up to 2 MB in
>> the shorter term. Also I just noticed the math error.
>>
>> Here is a revised spec (incorporating suggestions from Chun Wang):
>>
>> Specification
>>
>> * 1 MB, height < 210,000;
>> * 2 MB, height 210,000 < 420,000; (when 75% of last 1,000 blocks signal
>> support)
>> * 4 MB, height 420,000 < 630,000; (year 2016)
>> * 8 MB, height 630,000 < 840,000; (year ~2020)
>> * 16 MB, height 840,000 < 1,050,000; (year ~2024)
>> * 32 MB, height >= 1,050,000. (year ~2028)
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Chun Wang <1240902@gmail•com> wrote:
>>
>>> How about these specs:
>>> * 1 MB, height < 210000;
>>> * 2 MB, 210000 <= height < 420000;
>>> * 4 MB, 420000 <= height < 630000;
>>> * 8 MB, 630000 <= height < 840000;
>>> * 16 MB, 840000 <= height < 1050000;
>>> * 32 MB, height >= 1050000.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 7:47 AM, John Sacco via bitcoin-dev
>>> <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>> > Hi Devs,
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Please consider the draft proposal below for peer review.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > John
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > BIP
>>> >
>>> >   BIP: ?
>>> >
>>> >   Title: Block size doubles at each reward halving with max block size
>>> of
>>> > 32M
>>> >
>>> >   Author: John Sacco <johnsock@gmail•com>
>>> >
>>> >   Status: Draft
>>> >
>>> >   Type: Standards Track
>>> >
>>> >   Created: 2015-11-11
>>> >
>>> > Abstract
>>> >
>>> > Change max block size to 2MB at next block subsidy halving, and double
>>> the
>>> > block size at each subsidy halving until reaching 32MB.
>>> >
>>> > Copyright
>>> >
>>> > This proposal belongs in the public domain. Anyone can use this text
>>> for any
>>> > purpose with proper attribution to the author.
>>> >
>>> > Motivation
>>> >
>>> > 1.    Gradually restores block size to the default 32 MB setting
>>> originally
>>> > implemented by Satoshi.
>>> >
>>> > 2.    Initial increase to 2MB at block halving in July 2016 would have
>>> > minimal impact to existing nodes running on most hardware and networks.
>>> >
>>> > 3.    Long term solution that does not make enthusiastic assumptions
>>> > regarding future bandwidth and storage availability estimates.
>>> >
>>> > 4.    Maximum block size of 32MB allows peak usage of ~100 tx/sec by
>>> year
>>> > 2031.
>>> >
>>> > 5.    Exercise network upgrade procedure during subsidy reward
>>> halving, a
>>> > milestone event with the goal of increasing awareness among miners and
>>> node
>>> > operators.
>>> >
>>> > Specification
>>> >
>>> > 1.    Increase the maximum block size to 2MB when block 630,000 is
>>> reached
>>> > and 75% of the last 1,000 blocks have signaled support.
>>> >
>>> > 2.    Increase maximum block size to 4MB at block 840,000.
>>> >
>>> > 3.    Increase maximum block size to 8MB at block 1,050,000.
>>> >
>>> > 4.    Increase maximum block size to 16MB at block 1,260,000.
>>> >
>>> > 5.    Increase maximum block size to 32MB at block 1,470,000.
>>> >
>>> > Backward compatibility
>>> >
>>> > All older clients are not compatible with this change. The first block
>>> > larger than 1M will create a network partition excluding not-upgraded
>>> > network nodes and miners.
>>> >
>>> > Rationale
>>> >
>>> > While more comprehensive solutions are developed, an increase to the
>>> block
>>> > size is needed to continue network growth. A longer term solution is
>>> needed
>>> > to prevent complications associated with additional hard forks. It
>>> should
>>> > also increase at a gradual rate that retains and allows a large
>>> distribution
>>> > of full nodes.  Scheduling this hard fork to occur no earlier than the
>>> > subsidy halving in 2016 has the goal of simplifying the communication
>>> > outreach needed to achieve consensus, while also providing a buffer of
>>> time
>>> > to make necessary preparations.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
>>> > bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
>>> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 11019 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2015-11-13  9:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-12 23:47 John Sacco
2015-11-13  2:56 ` Chun Wang
2015-11-13  3:37   ` John Sacco
2015-11-13  7:49     ` Btc Drak
2015-11-13  9:50       ` John Sacco [this message]
2015-11-13 10:52         ` Luke Dashjr
     [not found]           ` <1447430469019.e0ee1956@Nodemailer>
2015-11-13 22:28             ` Luke Dashjr
2015-11-14  0:02               ` digitsu
2015-11-14  9:31                 ` Adam Back
2015-11-14 10:52                   ` Jorge Timón
2015-11-14 21:11                     ` Luke Dashjr
     [not found]                       ` <CADZB0_Z3Kf4GW0VATjb10kJF0aFgyFOcqX_=y+LFoUpsi+TRUA@mail.gmail.com>
2015-11-14 21:27                         ` Luke Dashjr
2015-11-15 12:16                           ` Jorge Timón
     [not found]                             ` <CABEog-XUNt9kDS7Mc0XYFjm5ePUT0m1YaAoG9VypTCiGLBongQ@mail.gmail.com>
2015-11-18 10:15                               ` Jorge Timón
2015-11-13  6:39   ` Luke Dashjr

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=CAEkt4XvGzkFipDwqD_m+56+vWxRaF+rRy8ydJJ7tqibcyjWJ0g@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=johnsock@gmail$(echo .)com \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=btcdrak@gmail$(echo .)com \
    --cc=luke@dashjr$(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