From: Sancho Panza <sanch0panza@protonmail•com>
To: "bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org"
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Generalized version bits voting (bip-genvbvoting)
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2017 17:58:43 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dzPLQRdfCA-BZY-9RKC8y3CRwMyc249kUe06HubPOfleURqIjoieInqDaKhuPMqHOcoUc779jpZITczj3aiqtoMYhGMU963BD99pfJnN6XM=@protonmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <FE6D0125-951A-47D6-A2E4-C161DCB56804@thomaskerin.io>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 977 bytes --]
Thomas,
> the change is not opt-in and will require coordination; and the continuation of the chain thereafter depends on people actually running the hard-fork code, not just being aware there is something happening.
This situation applies to soft forks as well.
- if you wish your software to validate correctly, it is not opt-in
- it requires coordination to activate without much orphan risk to miners (hence BIP9). Witness the long preparation time ahead of SegWit deployment for wallet providers, miners etc. to coordinate to support it on their systems
- after activation, it depends on people running it (most notably miners, otherwise the soft-fork is no longer enforced leading to a hard fork)
- awareness alone does not ensure full validation capability is retained during a soft fork
Therefore, these differences seem insignificant enough to merit treating soft and hard forks equal in terms of the coordination features afforded through the versionbits.
Sancho
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1189 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-08 21:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-03 9:06 Sancho Panza
2017-04-04 11:16 ` Tom Zander
2017-04-04 16:41 ` Sancho Panza
2017-04-04 16:49 ` Sancho Panza
2017-04-04 18:01 ` Luke Dashjr
2017-04-04 19:28 ` Sancho Panza
2017-04-05 10:08 ` Tom Zander
2017-04-05 14:09 ` Thomas Kerin
2017-04-08 21:58 ` Sancho Panza [this message]
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='dzPLQRdfCA-BZY-9RKC8y3CRwMyc249kUe06HubPOfleURqIjoieInqDaKhuPMqHOcoUc779jpZITczj3aiqtoMYhGMU963BD99pfJnN6XM=@protonmail.com' \
--to=sanch0panza@protonmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.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