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
|
Return-Path: <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E40A6D91
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 28 Aug 2015 21:15:42 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from resqmta-ch2-08v.sys.comcast.net
(resqmta-ch2-08v.sys.comcast.net [69.252.207.40])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FD59221
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 28 Aug 2015 21:15:42 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from resomta-ch2-18v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.114])
by resqmta-ch2-08v.sys.comcast.net with comcast
id AMFK1r0062Udklx01MFhWP; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 21:15:41 +0000
Received: from crushinator.localnet
([IPv6:2601:186:c000:825e:e9f4:8901:87c7:24a0])
by resomta-ch2-18v.sys.comcast.net with comcast
id AMFg1r00G4eLRLv01MFh2m; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 21:15:41 +0000
From: Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 17:15:40 -0400
Message-ID: <2081355.cHxjDEpgpW@crushinator>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.0.5-gentoo; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <CADJgMzvkBDBD9_=53kaD_6_jWH=vbWOnNwOKK5GOz8Du-F08dQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADJgMzvWKA79NHE2uFy1wb-zL3sjC5huspQcaDczxTqD_7gXOg@mail.gmail.com>
<CADr=VrQR6rYK4sJJsDpUdFJaWZqhv=AkMqcG64EhsOCg1tDxVg@mail.gmail.com>
<CADJgMzvkBDBD9_=53kaD_6_jWH=vbWOnNwOKK5GOz8Du-F08dQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net;
s=q20140121; t=1440796541;
bh=/zZw0VOIqPWCI9Js2e3jtIFZH/bRKNJnTj+hnVqfuX8=;
h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:
Content-Type;
b=wp1BvSlNkMQv6l+zWnDYoLRDdgMyXNL6+gOqq5xWO26iXSCdMPXpzk7jI4uHRjZUc
tnBNkA51pKdbR3+tk5pY3oPHhZdjgiRFSCG/YkIVSkdC1EMhGaYFb3FF5riipwGaLw
Szetyi3Ta7NEmDHffjJwJ6rAHe3rCIIl5Fwk+auMMEnWtl8v32M++F7QQGaL4MI2do
EsCewim04vB0UVNd4Cd9J0EIxWMeEZh/ScxpxxMXTKXHrwCAAOq9vIRdeUfszkZaRi
AW0iMRBvMmCTzYCT20mumierBSTILUT85IzF8EMTuJ0LDwxiqaQhCcEhFEwQ4s83rC
c71qpP2mzyY5g==
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Consensus based block size retargeting algorithm
(draft)
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 21:15:43 -0000
This is the best proposal I've seen yet. Allow me to summarize:
=E2=80=A2 It addresses the problem, in Jeff Garzik's BIP 100, of miners=
selling their block-size votes.
=E2=80=A2 It addresses the problem, in Gavin Andresen's BIP 101, of bli=
ndly trying to predict future market needs versus future technological =
capacities.
=E2=80=A2 It avoids a large step discontinuity in the block-size limit =
by starting with a 1-MB limit.
=E2=80=A2 It throttles changes to =C2=B110% every 2016 blocks.
=E2=80=A2 It imposes a tangible cost (higher difficulty) on miners who =
vote to raise the block-size limit.
=E2=80=A2 It avoids incentivizing miners to vote to lower the block-siz=
e limit.
However, this proposal currently fails to answer a very important quest=
ion:
=E2=80=A2 What is the mechanism for activation of the new consensus rul=
e? It is when a certain percentage of the blocks mined in a 2016-block =
retargeting period contain valid block-size votes?
https://github.com/btcdrak/bips/blob/bip-cbbsra/bip-cbbrsa.mediawiki
On Friday, 28 August 2015, at 9:28 pm, Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Pull request: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/187
|
