- We now are witnessing this... COOP vs LukeJr COOP, vs BIP148 vs BIP149 vs BIP91 ... how many are there?: https://xkcd.com/927 - If some miners and exchanges collude to enact a rapid 2MB+Segwit hard fork coin... and calling it "bitcoin" on major exchanges this could swiftly fragment the network. - If this fork fails to contain an ASICBOOST defense, then this is essentially an example of core failing to appropriately respond to the CVE security vulnerability in time. - A swift BIP148 release in core seems necessary to defend against this. I am no longer in favor of adding a BIP148 option with default "false".. I think it should be merged in...enabled, and released ASAP to defend against these attacks. On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Oliver Petruzel via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >>if the community wishes to adopt (by unanimous consensus) a 2 MB block > size hardfork, this is probably the best way to do it right now... Legacy > Bitcoin transactions are given the witness discount, and a block size limit > of 2 MB is imposed.<< > > > The above decision may quickly become very controversial. I don't think it's > what most users had/have in mind when they discuss a "2MB+SegWit" solution. > > With the current 1MB+SegWit, testing has shown us that normal usage > results in ~2 or 2.1MB blocks. > > I think most users will expect a linear increase when Base Size is > increased to 2000000 bytes and Total Weight is increased to 8000000 bytes. > With normal usage, the expected results would then be ~4 or 4.2MB blocks. > > Am I missing something here, or does Luke's suggested 2MB cap completely > nullify that expected linear increase? If so, why? What's the logic behind > this decision? > > I'd love to be armed with a good answer should my colleagues ask me the > same obvious question, so thank you ahead of time! > > Respectfully, > Oliver Petruzel > > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > >