I understand your proposal, but I don't see what it accomplishes compared to applying the new rule from the start (in your own blocks) and wait for 95% for consensus activation (which is my preference and it's much simpler to implement).
What are the disadvantages of my approach? What are the advantages of yours?

On Sep 16, 2015 4:57 PM, "Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:54 PM, Jorge Timón <jtimon@jtimon.cc> wrote:

On Sep 16, 2015 4:49 PM, "Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> At 75%, if someone sets the bit, then they should be creating valid blocks (under the rule).

You shouldn't rely on that, some may start applying the restrictions in their own blocks at 0% and others only at 90%. Until it becomes a consensus rule it is just part of the standard policy (and we shouldn't rely on nodes following the standard policy).

It would be a consensus rule.  If >75% of the blocks in the last 2016 window have the bit set, then reject all blocks that have the bit set and fail to meet the rule.

_______________________________________________
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