1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
|
Delivery-date: Thu, 04 Apr 2024 01:29:12 -0700
Received: from mail-yb1-f188.google.com ([209.85.219.188])
by mail.fairlystable.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256
(Exim 4.94.2)
(envelope-from <bitcoindev+bncBCD4XVPAVEHBBUGJXGYAMGQEZOUXXLQ@googlegroups.com>)
id 1rsIT9-0002MY-Rb
for bitcoindev@gnusha.org; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 01:29:12 -0700
Received: by mail-yb1-f188.google.com with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-dd933a044basf2293124276.0
for <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 01:29:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=googlegroups.com; s=20230601; t=1712219346; x=1712824146; darn=gnusha.org;
h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post
:list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-sender:mime-version
:subject:references:in-reply-to:message-id:to:from:date:sender:from
:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=0jmr8WhxYPOEZy2SZcK38TGqxpt9N7UrJMdTZcLa1AQ=;
b=QvnM2zI2m0vvHHduZUjoZLbL1n6uqWooX543zOS1mPdu5PfdlDNviga5pLoQNvwxNV
7pv/upHuWoMsMQfb1w6rv9BOoX4oZHhHlFST5ikWGYxyWvycKYxw9bnQEfewEkHR3M5E
qog+avaV1bBHgHYjA1+SF7xsgfCTqfOnuwet37xBri5NofNLSB27EXloex9Rqp0+atBh
gz84RlZ3A7WrdcSMJGaUS0/RyAIeXLuSe+KAMME5QnjzSFKed9RoDkczCUWYNtE29FBJ
juSn7SZRw76Zrrau7dXOUBjOpgbGFLqMpz4E9gpAKZnvILanAuoGxNorNyyv9vlh55y4
V5xg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1712219346; x=1712824146; darn=gnusha.org;
h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post
:list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-sender:mime-version
:subject:references:in-reply-to:message-id:to:from:date:from:to:cc
:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=0jmr8WhxYPOEZy2SZcK38TGqxpt9N7UrJMdTZcLa1AQ=;
b=CWKNYXdU0Q3V4z5JCrM63DHWpKCTx8zzCbN/P6TrnmT/dkJDyVi1+WHmQsaaIFo9E1
+Veqxg0cTondQeoU47FnoDNy2Wj7TAMpOjZNcPr/u4nv/8sRIlPT68+34nwtQKJncAxY
DvXnBgy3i9n7/I1nx4/KoLRIIe7PFW62vf9mP4d/tvrLeuHNVZgR+pp7Yi1T6LIv+sHh
L9pk2GGr0f6btH6EnEn8ieCaTazPtSd2UT9UM5BNGwQRjOnSCiWU/IOzLpLsyWAF8t2A
BEB6N+xybRf2YHUGE0bajibHsUeXnzVGtl5MvD6qofiUhrXIvTelIuI92Cyx2/S1EN6p
kQqQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1712219346; x=1712824146;
h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post
:list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-sender:mime-version
:subject:references:in-reply-to:message-id:to:from:date:x-beenthere
:x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to;
bh=0jmr8WhxYPOEZy2SZcK38TGqxpt9N7UrJMdTZcLa1AQ=;
b=m5OcNwQeVabuG5QHijBNfS4EQbNVYf80hvBWhbaw/AVk7M8F9Vj+1ZnTZId9nC6OZI
yneavEHKXEosHh7BJAd4nXhTIN39QIu+OGIHr8AULvIqOVICqNTq07OKCMg9HGF4te9G
Bvwh5ea/g31kg//axuR/9SAhm7i46w5rXTEzanmiXCSqaoFWzX20FLQroP21Hu4k3CxH
8TRwg0YIAJ1ekVf6u3PK6DkCG+rFMyISlWqOnLU2VZ0ieIlkbEvIIgAkl1jOjgr7vR71
ycYPO+IJbPiMKcZZr3Ire+w6b3wNhSyn+9cI8DW2fsFT/lcW4sqNmpAu1xm7V34gH4PR
v07A==
Sender: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU1/3imUCYUlSrS8MHzoePqG6Hj/a0Gtfenw/G/xoLXJa43Ld2CO1ZGLNZUJIxzbTeESWta2obkJXtaAAGXzKorww8190M=
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwdPH30soD192X8Y5xTjieaEet6KnHTllTYui4B2sP1NSdQj33c
kFSAk8Kky6y4B2AouCUXbLb85ITvsYWNqHfQQO4U7Gd7/LbziY4w
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEpuKE4qV281lHwpd2l9MfDGhSt6rV0NwFESzrVoOzFgYv7jnez7nVBFWJdezOLa6Xd8FIIJw==
X-Received: by 2002:a25:bb43:0:b0:dc7:421d:bcc0 with SMTP id b3-20020a25bb43000000b00dc7421dbcc0mr1163672ybk.32.1712219345307;
Thu, 04 Apr 2024 01:29:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
Received: by 2002:a25:750b:0:b0:dcb:f35a:afeb with SMTP id q11-20020a25750b000000b00dcbf35aafebls11824ybc.2.-pod-prod-06-us;
Thu, 04 Apr 2024 01:29:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:2b0b:b0:dc6:5396:c0d4 with SMTP id fi11-20020a0569022b0b00b00dc65396c0d4mr482364ybb.1.1712219344278;
Thu, 04 Apr 2024 01:29:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 2002:a05:690c:8:b0:611:2a20:d0cc with SMTP id 00721157ae682-61584531e4cms7b3;
Thu, 4 Apr 2024 01:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:690c:6301:b0:615:8a1:9a94 with SMTP id ho1-20020a05690c630100b0061508a19a94mr553581ywb.0.1712218461923;
Thu, 04 Apr 2024 01:14:21 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 01:14:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Calvin Kim <ccychc@gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Development Mailing List <bitcoindev@googlegroups.com>
Message-Id: <950b875a-e430-4bd8-870d-f9a9fab2493an@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADL_X_eXjbRFROuJU0b336vPVy5Q2RJvhcx64NSNPH-3fDCUfw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADL_X_eXjbRFROuJU0b336vPVy5Q2RJvhcx64NSNPH-3fDCUfw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [bitcoindev] Re: The Future of Bitcoin Testnet
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="----=_Part_3966_213186979.1712218461516"
X-Original-Sender: ccychc@gmail.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; contact bitcoindev+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <bitcoindev.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 786775582512
List-Post: <https://groups.google.com/group/bitcoindev/post>, <mailto:bitcoindev@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <https://groups.google.com/support/>, <mailto:bitcoindev+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <https://groups.google.com/group/bitcoindev
List-Subscribe: <https://groups.google.com/group/bitcoindev/subscribe>, <mailto:bitcoindev+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:googlegroups-manage+786775582512+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>,
<https://groups.google.com/group/bitcoindev/subscribe>
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
------=_Part_3966_213186979.1712218461516
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_Part_3967_1198645740.1712218461516"
------=_Part_3967_1198645740.1712218461516
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Throwing myself into the conversation because I think there's other devs
that use testnet like I do.
I mainly use testnet for checking if the utreexod implementation I'm
building runs into consensus
bugs due to the havoc of how testnet creates bursts of blocks and how it
reorganizes itself. I find
the unpredictability a feature.
> 1. Testnet3 has been running for 13 years. It's on block 2.5 million
something and the block reward is down to ~0.014 TBTC, so mining is not
doing a great job at distributing testnet coins any more.
For my usage I never really see this as a problem since signet already
provides that usecase. While
I can empathize with devs struggling to get coins, there's always signet
for the usecase of testing
scripts/wallets. Signet doesn't really provide the same feature for my
usecase.
> 2. The reason the block height is insanely high is due to a rather
amusing edge case bug that causes the difficulty to regularly get reset to
1, which causes a bit of havoc. If you want a deep dive into the quirk:
https://blog.lopp.net/the-block-storms-of-bitcoins-testnet/
I stated this above but I find this as a feature.
> 3. Testnet3 is being actively used for scammy airdrops; those of us who
tend to be generous with our testnet coins are getting hounded by
non-developers chasing cheap gains.
Could I get links/sources for this? I'm curious as to how big of a problem
this is.
> 4. As a result, TBTC is being actively bought and sold; one could argue
that the fundamental principle of testnet coins having no value has been
broken.
Same for this. Would appreciate links/evidence.
> 1. Should we plan for a reset of testnet? If so, given how long it has
been since the last reset and how many production systems will need to be
updated, would a reset need to be done with a great deal of notice?
I lean towards no unless the problem with testnet coins being valued is too
significant.
> 2. Is there interest in fixing the difficulty reset bug? It should be a
one liner fix, and I'd argue it could be done sooner rather than later, and
orthogonal to the network reset question. Would such a change, which would
technically be a hard fork (but also arguably a self resolving fork due to
the difficulty dynamics) necessitate a BIP or could we just YOLO it?
Again, I'd lean towards keeping it the same.
> 3. Is all of the above a waste of time and we should instead deprecate
testnet in favor of signet?
No as signet doesn't have the features I find valuable in testnet.
Best,
Calvin
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/950b875a-e430-4bd8-870d-f9a9fab2493an%40googlegroups.com.
------=_Part_3967_1198645740.1712218461516
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Throwing myself into the conversation because I think there's other devs th=
at use testnet like I do.<div>I mainly use testnet for checking if the utre=
exod implementation I'm building runs into consensus</div><div>bugs due to =
the havoc of how testnet creates bursts of blocks and how it reorganizes it=
self. I find</div><div>the unpredictability a feature.</div><div><br /></di=
v><div><div>> 1. Testnet3 has been running for 13 years. It's on block 2=
.5 million something and the block reward is down to ~0.014 TBTC, so mining=
is not doing a great job at distributing testnet coins any more.</div><div=
><br /></div><div>For my usage I never really see this as a problem since s=
ignet already provides that usecase. While</div><div>I can empathize with d=
evs struggling to get coins, there's always signet for the usecase of testi=
ng</div><div>scripts/wallets. Signet doesn't really provide the same featur=
e for my usecase.=C2=A0</div><div><br /></div><div>>=C2=A0<span>2. The r=
eason the block height is insanely high is due to a rather amusing edge cas=
e bug that causes the difficulty to regularly get reset to 1, which causes =
a bit of havoc. If you want a deep dive into the quirk:=C2=A0</span><a href=
=3D"https://blog.lopp.net/the-block-storms-of-bitcoins-testnet/" target=3D"=
_blank" rel=3D"nofollow">https://blog.lopp.net/the-block-storms-of-bitcoins=
-testnet/</a></div><div><span><br /></span></div><div>I stated this above b=
ut I find this as a feature.</div><div><br /></div><div>> 3. Testnet3 is=
being actively used for scammy airdrops; those of us who tend to be genero=
us with our testnet coins are getting hounded by non-developers chasing che=
ap gains.<br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Could I get links/sources for th=
is? I'm curious as to how big of a problem this is.</div><div><br /></div><=
div>> 4. As a result, TBTC is being actively bought and sold; one could =
argue that the fundamental principle of testnet=C2=A0coins having no value =
has been broken.<br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Same for this. Would appr=
eciate links/evidence.</div><div><br /></div><div><div>> 1. Should we pl=
an for a reset of testnet? If so, given how long it has been since the last=
reset and how many production systems will need to be updated, would a res=
et need to be done with a great deal of notice?</div><div><br /></div><div>=
I lean towards no unless the problem with testnet coins being valued is too=
significant.</div><div><br /></div><div>> 2. Is there interest in fixin=
g the difficulty reset bug? It should be a one liner fix, and I'd argue it =
could be done sooner rather than later, and orthogonal to the network reset=
question. Would such a change, which would technically be a hard fork (but=
also arguably a self resolving fork due to the difficulty dynamics) necess=
itate a BIP or could we just YOLO it?</div><div><br /></div><div>Again, I'd=
lean towards keeping it the same.</div><div><br /></div><div>> 3. Is al=
l of the above a waste of time and we should instead deprecate testnet in f=
avor of signet?</div></div><div><br /></div><div>No as signet doesn't have =
the features I find valuable in testnet.<br /></div><div><br /></div><div>B=
est,</div><div>Calvin</div><div><div><blockquote style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0=
px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-col=
or: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
</blockquote></div></div></div>
<p></p>
-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">bitcoind=
ev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To view this discussion on the web visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.c=
om/d/msgid/bitcoindev/950b875a-e430-4bd8-870d-f9a9fab2493an%40googlegroups.=
com?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dfooter">https://groups.google.com/d/msg=
id/bitcoindev/950b875a-e430-4bd8-870d-f9a9fab2493an%40googlegroups.com</a>.=
<br />
------=_Part_3967_1198645740.1712218461516--
------=_Part_3966_213186979.1712218461516--
|
