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
|
Return-Path: <sergio.d.lerner@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3825480
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 9 May 2017 16:19:55 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-qt0-f177.google.com (mail-qt0-f177.google.com
[209.85.216.177])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CDD2F0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 9 May 2017 16:19:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qt0-f177.google.com with SMTP id t26so5235473qtg.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 09 May 2017 09:19:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=wh1/+9SZYkCyLhca63q3ycuF0Ya0rYI0RG5cGZaHAa8=;
b=aJrl6m8YCqC3guGELRe4lG+PM27HzfyMOaStj6Ytx1UvYUQzkd469FtMiVxcb8mLhI
bSvWmB8Pe/PKHJZAGb4Iba/RHmmZ9PzvsrDI7jrsJYnKCfm0St/59ecVR89xaBf+KgDx
DHu3at49F4OlTgE3pnMjeHd65jitZeWurtvGC5MqxdPk9cy59umCsogv2IKQJ8XZ3mA+
F/DYxK0lv2cVn//6gyh8gcs3WF72Mm+zhmhNjE5UEDXDIs/nMPlVFRD8ArtijnmFyOh9
wEiGfKpLBTBHvv6UQEA2x54eW2Kt3KHEVhekaEbY9O/O/aFVwY+UKlCUbYSOdhSbuxgO
a8+Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=wh1/+9SZYkCyLhca63q3ycuF0Ya0rYI0RG5cGZaHAa8=;
b=nloVeZ+2gtaXtoaNdFBWuhiRuBqiedo5exkICMeC22TLzBtuINuioLBuEi8krnZbih
iYrf948JZoHweFSQ6mG1IZ06R19v6GWFzg+/NNwfAb7N2xbvn3swB8mzkol6ylf+fq2K
P+jDB8kirPOE2oSWDXUtseZD7b+sbzzq+klYXLIIv/ZmIil01RvvBm4UdlBYNlXfZNqM
mQ5jaO5x7Ba2JlxbI0+1MGOdXu5RPQJoBoQZbs5N3q0K9/l5gwrUo6exdpGPcUGSzMXS
1pW8GC8zi/GclROOu0rEFWEFEW2Ge7cEhpLVodeOEzJOZ+Z33dliErqmAQNS1UnClBbm
7RpQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDkGnY6+JdD4uPf5+2pcZ9E79eXwzOjnCmUJZu5S4W0S4wf+/w4
+S1uf8+vNqlMak3DZdVEFn8ULIkB1A==
X-Received: by 10.200.54.103 with SMTP id n36mr980441qtb.286.1494346794315;
Tue, 09 May 2017 09:19:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.12.165.132 with HTTP; Tue, 9 May 2017 09:19:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <7B918396-5968-4908-83C8-0F77DA8DB037@xbt.hk>
References: <CAKzdR-qojNn8OtUTPbxa0JauK9nmo2ZGm4ihKuyzsz_FAgokDw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAMBsKS_j7Lso6fHoMPkrQ7UFwKfxOERAAqL=aUF83O4CqL+iFg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKzdR-on-w9EF+2hLjchdyHB1gj7fi4QnybA=J4Cz7yyN3KKNA@mail.gmail.com>
<7B918396-5968-4908-83C8-0F77DA8DB037@xbt.hk>
From: Sergio Demian Lerner <sergio.d.lerner@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 13:19:13 -0300
Message-ID: <CAKzdR-rKQaiKF18j44HjxuHY5pcmPwsce5ab-+zGRDnxjhBQdw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Johnson Lau <jl2012@xbt.hk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113a6592d8b69e054f19b92f
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Some real-world results about the current Segwit
Discount
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 May 2017 16:19:55 -0000
--001a113a6592d8b69e054f19b92f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks Johnson and Hampus for the clarifications.
However, I would rather do the opposite: soft-fork to 50% now, and
soft-fork again to 75% discount later if needed, because it doesn't affect
the max transactions/second.
Segwit as it is today should be activated. However if it is not before
November, then for the next Segwit attempt I would choose a more
conservative 50% discount.
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Johnson Lau <jl2012@xbt.hk> wrote:
>
> > On 9 May 2017, at 21:49, Sergio Demian Lerner via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > So it seems the 75% discount has been chosen with the idea that in the
> future the current transaction pattern will shift towards multisigs. This
> is not a bad idea, as it's the only direction Bitcoin can scale without a
> HF.
> > But it's a bad idea if we end up doing, for example, a 2X blocksize
> increase HF in the future. In that case it's much better to use a 50%
> witness discount, and do not make scaling risky by making the worse case
> block size 8 Mbytes, when it could have been 2*2.7=3D5.4 Mbytes.
> >
>
> As we could change any parameter in a hardfork, I don=E2=80=99t think thi=
s has any
> relation with the current BIP141 proposal. We could just use 75% in a
> softfork, and change that to a different value (or completely redefine th=
e
> definition of weight) with a hardfork later.
>
>
>
--001a113a6592d8b69e054f19b92f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Thanks Johnson and Hampus for the clarifications.=C2=A0<di=
v>However, I would rather do the opposite: soft-fork to 50% now, and soft-f=
ork again to 75% discount later if needed, because it doesn't affect th=
e max transactions/second.=C2=A0<div><br></div><div>Segwit as it is today s=
hould be activated. However if it is not before November, then for the next=
Segwit attempt I would choose a more conservative 50% discount.</div><div>=
<div><br></div><div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div><div class=3D"gm=
ail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 12:45 PM, =
Johnson Lau <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:jl2012@xbt.hk" target=
=3D"_blank">jl2012@xbt.hk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gma=
il_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-lef=
t:1ex"><span class=3D""><br>
> On 9 May 2017, at 21:49, Sergio Demian Lerner via bitcoin-dev <<a h=
ref=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.<wbr=
>linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> So it seems the 75% discount has been chosen with the idea that in the=
future the current transaction pattern will shift towards multisigs. This =
is not a bad idea, as it's the only direction Bitcoin can scale without=
a HF.<br>
> But it's a bad idea if we end up doing, for example, a 2X blocksiz=
e increase HF in the future. In that case it's much better to use a 50%=
witness discount, and do not make scaling risky by making the worse case b=
lock size 8 Mbytes, when it could have been 2*2.7=3D5.4 Mbytes.<br>
><br>
<br>
</span>As we could change any parameter in a hardfork, I don=E2=80=99t thin=
k this has any relation with the current BIP141 proposal. We could just use=
75% in a softfork, and change that to a different value (or completely red=
efine the definition of weight) with a hardfork later.<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
--001a113a6592d8b69e054f19b92f--
|
