Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56FF0C2E for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2015 00:58:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-vk0-f46.google.com (mail-vk0-f46.google.com [209.85.213.46]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9D56106 for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2015 00:58:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vkha189 with SMTP id a189so33635321vkh.2 for ; Tue, 08 Dec 2015 16:58:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jtimon-cc.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=jl5pCFyrny0L9bV04AJOvfSehBVUCZim4ZvOKSn2Z9I=; b=GORCkP38/sVBB6M24w9fEwJXHo+vIa+AWjBakl/cP0Ohgrla16kUrYHHMrjDbn2oJH 3lAAo2YqBnFP5vcm/j3tI+L1bBcN1HER0O1J+SlyXWdI19R+LcolL2CBmLQHJOP6448g SrRtO8kUp2GK5pln9/jnXwMfqPQ6Z3I3fqowzid+jfpYCCRXjByrFlYbYqzxjyODSKK4 cn6d1+aYG8Xj9TF35gQhXBpPiWT+Y352fwULLqZwzYgfbBuksQhSNJT3PL0v4n5slEsA ccUVjUnz1888nV8NxptK+0EZXVoLhUdjPq1juS0OLjThZgNucdgFw+v8OdVYsT03itTy I/uA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=jl5pCFyrny0L9bV04AJOvfSehBVUCZim4ZvOKSn2Z9I=; b=S3U+KrS9GAIK660kaFSc2Yul8MScPY2VAue3CLm2W+kAwYAsY6IauYPsteKMvOlrke roEMTzGYDIHvOEGbROO19QYUKx4DIX5Vbj+OhdxEgDVhgJjry+uE5cef68iGxYkiI++1 LMhedY9Zr8LTbMF6XlS2NqvDrELzwuSKzjkyNTYzp2dIiu3jOVkIw/Ruq/iQzvzhu9ha hDmSYCDCUlbsBNaZb+c9CIWLOVXpbLyYmoWJbnIVc17GN7qJo/0zG9HwV0Jjd9ZATe78 LxH97oZ2ki/m4xKR6Pb/3lZkHMFFXaZ6yweTMLrNRyaf6nmxhw8UzK8FTyz4c9TcRDZs SMdw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkmIRmTXNC1gonGoV+xaH9lg6oesZr+prw7BVBt6eFPyGaNXTCZsqRkr1uRj/bGS1TCXSp8M4LAPbxBZMfgaJT9n5OYlg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.31.16.197 with SMTP id 66mr2254466vkq.143.1449622687041; Tue, 08 Dec 2015 16:58:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.31.236.70 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Dec 2015 16:58:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20151208110752.GA31180@amethyst.visucore.com> Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 01:58:06 +0100 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= To: Gregory Maxwell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Capacity increases for the Bitcoin system. X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2015 00:58:08 -0000 On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev > wrote: > We already have consensus critical enforcement there, the height, > which has almost never been problematic. (A popular block explorer > recently misimplemented the var-int decode and suffered an outage). It would be also a nice opportunity to move the height to a more accessible place. For example CBlockHeader::hashMerkleRoot (and CBlockIndex's) could be replaced with a hash of the following struct: struct hashRootStruct { uint256 hashMerkleRoot; uint256 hashWitnessesRoot; int32_t nHeight; } > From a risk reduction perspective, I think it is much preferable to > perform the primary change in a backwards compatible manner, and pick > up the data reorganization in a hardfork if anyone even cares. But then all wallet software will need to adapt their software twice. Why introduce technical debt for no good reason? > I think thats generally a nice cadence to split up risks that way; and > avoid controversy. Uncontroversial hardforks can also be deployed with small risks as described in BIP99.