From: "Hampus Sjöberg" <hampus.sjoberg@gmail•com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr•org>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Dynamic MaxBlockSize - 3 Byte Solution
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 18:10:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFMkqK8fuB0BSpVsSnzgBv1WkZx_8Wqi4BQ6dL95PeGExM1nHQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201911111647.06200.luke@dashjr.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1428 bytes --]
> It ISN'T low right now...
I agree, but I don't think it's a good idea to softfork it to lower than 4M
WU though, and I don't think we need to;
hopefully when exchanges start using Lightning or Liquid, avg blocksize
will go down.
> Extension blocks are not softforks, and are unreasonably convoluted for
no
real gain. When the time comes, the block size should be increased only
using
a hardfork.
It depends on how you define soft and hardforks, I suspect you don't see
extension blocks as a softforks because old nodes won't maintain a correct
UTXO set.
I think an extension block is a softfork because old nodes will still be
able to follow the mainchain.
I don't know if a blocksize increase hardfork will get consensus as the
idea has been ruined by all malicious hijack attempts we've seen over the
years.
Hampus
Den mån 11 nov. 2019 kl 17:47 skrev Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr•org>:
> On Monday 11 November 2019 16:08:43 Hampus Sjöberg via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > I am advocating to keep the blocksize low right now,
>
> It ISN'T low right now...
>
> > but I don't leave out
> > in increasing it in the future when we have a need for it, preferably via
> > an extension block (softfork).
>
> Extension blocks are not softforks, and are unreasonably convoluted for no
> real gain. When the time comes, the block size should be increased only
> using
> a hardfork.
>
> Luke
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2089 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-11 17:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-07 3:33 Trevor Groves
2019-11-08 14:36 ` Emil Engler
2019-11-08 15:19 ` Joachim Strömbergson
2019-11-08 17:04 ` Alberto Aldave
2019-11-11 16:08 ` Hampus Sjöberg
2019-11-11 16:47 ` Luke Dashjr
2019-11-11 17:10 ` Hampus Sjöberg [this message]
2019-11-11 19:56 ` Luke Dashjr
2019-11-11 13:52 ` ZmnSCPxj
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=CAFMkqK8fuB0BSpVsSnzgBv1WkZx_8Wqi4BQ6dL95PeGExM1nHQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=hampus.sjoberg@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--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