From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Mining centralization pressure from non-uniform propagation speed
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 20:39:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBjD1y6jTzdWqGLhBxve8HfKy0mxg0tYBTWjBH1PAukmow@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150612183054.GD19199@muck>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1270 bytes --]
If there is a benefit in producing larger more-fee blocks if they propagate
slowly, then there is also a benefit in including high-fee transactions
that are unlikely to propagate quickly through optimized relay protocols
(for example: very recent transactions, or out-of-band receoved ones). This
effect is likely an order of magnitude less important still, but the effect
is likely the same.
On Jun 12, 2015 8:31 PM, "Peter Todd" <pete@petertodd•org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 01:21:46PM -0400, Gavin Andresen wrote:
> > Nice work, Pieter. You're right that my simulation assumed bandwidth for
> > 'block' messages isn't the bottleneck.
> >
> > But doesn't Matt's fast relay network (and the work I believe we're both
> > planning on doing in the near future to further optimize block
> propagation)
> > make both of our simulations irrelevant in the long-run?
>
> Then simulate first the relay network assuming 100% of txs use it, and
> secondly, assuming 100%-x use it.
>
> For instance, is it in miners' advantage in some cases to sabotage the
> relay network? The analyse say yes, so lets simulate that. Equally even
> the relay network isn't instant.
>
> --
> 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
> 0000000000000000127ab1d576dc851f374424f1269c4700ccaba2c42d97e778
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1696 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-12 18:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-12 16:51 Pieter Wuille
2015-06-12 17:21 ` Gavin Andresen
2015-06-12 18:30 ` Peter Todd
2015-06-12 18:39 ` Pieter Wuille [this message]
2015-06-12 18:01 ` Peter Todd
2015-06-12 18:24 ` Mike Hearn
2015-06-12 18:26 ` Pieter Wuille
2015-06-12 18:27 ` Mike Hearn
2015-06-14 17:45 ` Jonas Nick
2015-06-18 22:00 ` Tom Harding
2015-06-19 1:31 ` Yifu Guo
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=CAPg+sBjD1y6jTzdWqGLhBxve8HfKy0mxg0tYBTWjBH1PAukmow@mail.gmail.com \
--to=pieter.wuille@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=pete@petertodd$(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