Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F14CC002D for ; Wed, 19 Oct 2022 13:54:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DD1983FC2 for ; Wed, 19 Oct 2022 13:54:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 7DD1983FC2 Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=dpnrD+Jp X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T-xvvN5nbmbz for ; Wed, 19 Oct 2022 13:54:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org B9DB283FA6 Received: from mail-lf1-x130.google.com (mail-lf1-x130.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::130]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9DB283FA6 for ; Wed, 19 Oct 2022 13:54:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id bp15so28229785lfb.13 for ; Wed, 19 Oct 2022 06:54:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+bW/sCV989+hfkmM8b9IPCWJ3+OU1dnNPeuKOSQ7ttY=; b=dpnrD+Jpd+AMkymXdS0t8wr5rcJhBlUhuGpaXzcG2R2QfECC5eGgXGaU45KZGaZQeO 1ATJSIaiKpfNqIiH4r9AL2sGkgv50SZMBAitX8JL5y0DocSjLgqkOqDpwrU2pPzjrIsH tcniy7fjQfUa3PYDa6rBvIOgR+tT19scn9m8yn5uUamO4Ulh6BWQ/uU7VyuzQ8Ga17wi fHFqHVg0l3gJ91V6fAjCsH4idYeF5RhvKHF+HjM4uM13eQ4lCNetV7JnLYWnYUAkZqlQ SyYjxCqXqT8SsNAVfG3vw3evld3/aegJ60889hcbc3/OCrkgHTNI0ZHdI3gyfPy0w63i +8Og== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+bW/sCV989+hfkmM8b9IPCWJ3+OU1dnNPeuKOSQ7ttY=; b=p/UMjwoYxx/m1Ku2I5byO4JnsdYKMaN+e05zwmBqYH4b2gZVRoUiFrnhrcDVP3kiNs /xaUAemif8ntg/MCwP15uLcRwxkR3xkvwGvLort2iG1OHImk/rRTcUYry002IAXPDZRi fkc50CAngd7vRi+A95WbnMs9EHiLfQnyHd/bYnAUiFvQb2L1ZJOgBWfCF2VOlVxZo+2M jkGDiO4Rwo4XaMKFnUbO82J9AK1GlTkSxnCXLNGfDLeq3khA1RkoMKMLczqohyPFyvfA JV9CTSrkoMaqU8+CSuexnSMB0FnK9foxwI33onIjuoYPFd/DqONhXv4MsTMK3tIW/x7p XU4A== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf2FGbblUL04SJv7qD9GOqxbMU/2axdC613frFR1zMGu+1rWpaoV 1QwbVpdpptez51WKSzhhCP0VegcZXlH3N1iCnEE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM6q22HA58a2H0Zw+MKjcpuQhxB7RNNkd/vajftN57zt2kcW3IC8DgIHwW+4LiwQD7uUKovAoHcXWZYx1qlB8/I= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4f03:0:b0:496:272:625d with SMTP id k3-20020ac24f03000000b004960272625dmr2767204lfr.303.1666187665310; Wed, 19 Oct 2022 06:54:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Bryan Bishop Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 08:54:11 -0500 Message-ID: To: mm-studios , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion , Bryan Bishop Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000eb8bb905eb638b75" Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] brickchain X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 13:54:30 -0000 --000000000000eb8bb905eb638b75 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi, On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 6:34 AM mm-studios via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Fully filled brick B0, with a hash that doesn't meet the difficulty rule, > would be broadcasted and nodes would have it on in a separate fork as usual. > Check out the previous "weak block" proposals: https://diyhpl.us/~bryan/irc/bitcoin/weak-blocks-links.2016-05-09.txt - Bryan https://twitter.com/kanzure --000000000000eb8bb905eb638b75 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 6:34 AM mm-studios via bit= coin-dev <bitco= in-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
Fully filled brick B0, with a hash that doesn't meet the difficulty rule,=20 would be broadcasted and nodes would have it on in a separate fork as=20 usual.
=C2=A0
Check out the previous &= quot;weak block" proposals:
https://diyhpl.us/~bryan/irc/bit= coin/weak-blocks-links.2016-05-09.txt

--000000000000eb8bb905eb638b75--