path: root/7b/6bae0726ddd356625fc4f9cacb697ffc93f18a

Return-Path: <samad.sajanlal@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA96E978
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu, 29 Mar 2018 05:14:44 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-io0-f176.google.com (mail-io0-f176.google.com
	[209.85.223.176])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85FC0163
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu, 29 Mar 2018 05:14:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-io0-f176.google.com with SMTP id o4so6204947iod.3
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Wed, 28 Mar 2018 22:14:43 -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=Cc4GTKlvSJWf2U/IMc5v0ItK0bOMc7ZGpXVXwt88iPw=;
	b=AvRO9hmexg9HeIHAIKPFlSkcJu+IFkqQe6GvG1XKmfkWEpPT5VqLL6WEVlfuzDw0Oo
	Gsg/0izW32gdz59geK+hqExbQqpXRraPD/cRSWNdjZpb4xBwk+ekEDTEidVsH7UfgHmU
	RWjMksAwv25WuILbkXcDR3fQGBzFD3PrMw9QHxakZg2rR0o8XELH1Nd8oLdbqdfq6AKa
	O+/OTsfEqwm3XSjd1Q+vhCB2lnMsOOP3gzMgHsnTT58cI0P8U5Zu0qPrxJW5e7HawKGX
	UihJvSKhwN5tBOLKogAulLA85sQUBEm2GBT8UuH3pfi4I7bPSVKQK59kmUggxKyU6tvt
	xPQA==
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=Cc4GTKlvSJWf2U/IMc5v0ItK0bOMc7ZGpXVXwt88iPw=;
	b=KRBhLGGofGld9IqZmHB+I0OKPxJLufbRxpEyfwFnNU4p6FZGncC/CgJQeaKx8lxxEk
	Vvc7oYCEseJIfgzvXferddvcXVs+gsX8qBXzGMGApPpXQtDKhclX6uxGEAhb/eIMSpwi
	P3XEjhcMbYIOsBl4UOOsWXaKrrOEwMVDfIXWx9nyA/EUv0im2H2KqaIv9y7TAu5hdnSq
	7OBjFL0q15x++z8Owq58OPLq+URVyRXZzZdyYnZGWtuSsXIQsmzjJUxC+UdW11lXPWTT
	6EzXkSh8lvQJOHhGkzYd6if9zSuUCVWw049NFReBPQQWnI10A1pdjabIc8ZcaS6yvAxY
	gVJA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7GclOJyI5fUS8Nx+PUz9bUgDeh0n3/PEQBoq951hDgporibkH9E
	K4TI3a1O/+j43E3vJWbl4Ykhcp2k8JUNmFX4whwkFQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELvENMVC3raNW+t7FUpB5xgtAS9lnN+HFMP1HFaFLnhstB2F2hcewR7wNKWpUQXIGAuV3FWFQNY1epJRsrP8vsU=
X-Received: by 10.107.16.65 with SMTP id y62mr50189773ioi.213.1522300482816;
	Wed, 28 Mar 2018 22:14:42 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.107.140.147 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 22:14:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDq2pa_8T7Xhniuyh86eTi=PmSA_t=2Z0nYp1LhN=zc_NA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAQZUuDEJeMFTxxJcgUEmTUQbxM_ZWkBD1k+UOvafsqbqj++Jg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDq2pa_8T7Xhniuyh86eTi=PmSA_t=2Z0nYp1LhN=zc_NA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Samad Sajanlal <samad.sajanlal@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 00:14:42 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAQZUuCW+dijXgLOkDwjx8sCnhFbygqaT-0gLxAwx7EEx=VcaQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113f2256850efb056886333a"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
	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
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 18:16:24 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Soft Fork Activation & Enforcement w/o Signaling?
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: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 05:14:45 -0000

--001a113f2256850efb056886333a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Excellent - Thanks for your response Jorge. This helps us plan out the
future upgrades properly.
Since I see 0.15 and 0.16 use block versions as 0x20000000, whereas the
current deployed codebase (based on bitcoin 0.9.4) makes versions
0x00000002 (as seen by a 0.15 client), it appears safe to activate soft
forks which require a minimum of version 3 and 4 blocks (0x00000003
and 0x00000004,
respectively). Would you agree?

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 7:55 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@jtimon.cc> wrote:

> Yes, you can activate softforks at a given height.
> I don't see any reason why you couldn't rebase to 0.16 directly.
> The block version bumping was a mistake in bip34, you don't really
> need to bump the version number. In any case, I would recommend
> reading bip34 and what it activates in the code. IIRC the last thing
> was bip65.
>
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 11:04 PM, Samad Sajanlal via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > Is it possible to activate soft forks such as BIP65 and BIP66 without
> prior
> > signaling from miners? I noticed in chainparams.cpp that there are bloc=
k
> > heights where the enforcement begins.
> >
> > I understand this is already active on bitcoin. I'm working on a projec=
t
> > that is a clone of a clone of bitcoin, and we currently do not have
> BIP65 or
> > BIP66 enforced - no signaling of these soft forks either (most of the
> > network is on a source code fork of bitcoin 0.9). This project does not
> and
> > never intends to attempt to replace bitcoin - we know that without
> bitcoin
> > our project could never exist, so we owe a great deal of gratitude to t=
he
> > bitcoin developers.
> >
> > If the entire network upgrades to the correct version of the software
> (based
> > on bitcoin 0.15), which includes the block height that has enforcement,
> can
> > we simply skip over the signaling and go straight into
> > activation/enforcement?
> >
> > At this time we are lucky that our network is very small, so it is
> > reasonable to assume that the whole network will upgrade their clients
> > within a short window (~2 weeks). We would schedule the activation ~2
> months
> > out from when the client is released, just to ensure everyone has time =
to
> > upgrade.
> >
> > We have been stuck on the 0.9 code branch and my goal is to bring it up
> to
> > 0.15 at least, so that we can implement Segwit and other key features
> that
> > bitcoin has introduced. The 0.15 client currently works with regards to
> > sending and receiving transactions but the soft forks are not active. I
> > understand that activating them will segregate the 0.15 clients onto
> their
> > own fork, which is why I'd like to understand the repercussions of doin=
g
> it
> > without any signaling beforehand. I also would prefer not to have to ma=
ke
> > intermediate releases such as 0.10, 0.11.. etc to get the soft forks
> > activated.
> >
> > Another related question - does the block version get bumped up
> > automatically at the time that a soft fork activates, or is there
> additional
> > stuff that I need to do within the code to ensure it bumps up at the sa=
me
> > time? From what I saw in the code it appears that it will bump up
> > automatically, but I would like some confirmation on that.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Samad
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
> > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> >
>

--001a113f2256850efb056886333a
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Excellent - Thanks for your response Jorge. This help=
s us plan out the future upgrades properly.<br></div>Since I see 0.15 and 0=
.16 use block versions as <span class=3D"gmail-username-wrapper"></span><sp=
an class=3D"gmail-message-content">0x20000000, whereas the current deployed=
 codebase (based on bitcoin 0.9.4) makes versions<span class=3D"gmail-messa=
ge-content"> 0x00000002=20
(as seen by a 0.15 client), it appears safe to activate soft forks which re=
quire a minimum of version 3 and 4 blocks (<span class=3D"gmail-message-con=
tent">0x00000003</span> and <span class=3D"gmail-message-content">0x0000000=
4, respectively). Would you agree? </span></span></span><br></div><div clas=
s=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 7:=
55 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:jtimon@jtim=
on.cc" target=3D"_blank">jtimon@jtimon.cc</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockqu=
ote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc s=
olid;padding-left:1ex">Yes, you can activate softforks at a given height.<b=
r>
I don&#39;t see any reason why you couldn&#39;t rebase to 0.16 directly.<br=
>
The block version bumping was a mistake in bip34, you don&#39;t really<br>
need to bump the version number. In any case, I would recommend<br>
reading bip34 and what it activates in the code. IIRC the last thing<br>
was bip65.<br>
<div><div class=3D"h5"><br>
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 11:04 PM, Samad Sajanlal via bitcoin-dev<br>
&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@li=
sts.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; Is it possible to activate soft forks such as BIP65 and BIP66 without =
prior<br>
&gt; signaling from miners? I noticed in chainparams.cpp that there are blo=
ck<br>
&gt; heights where the enforcement begins.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I understand this is already active on bitcoin. I&#39;m working on a p=
roject<br>
&gt; that is a clone of a clone of bitcoin, and we currently do not have BI=
P65 or<br>
&gt; BIP66 enforced - no signaling of these soft forks either (most of the<=
br>
&gt; network is on a source code fork of bitcoin 0.9). This project does no=
t and<br>
&gt; never intends to attempt to replace bitcoin - we know that without bit=
coin<br>
&gt; our project could never exist, so we owe a great deal of gratitude to =
the<br>
&gt; bitcoin developers.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; If the entire network upgrades to the correct version of the software =
(based<br>
&gt; on bitcoin 0.15), which includes the block height that has enforcement=
, can<br>
&gt; we simply skip over the signaling and go straight into<br>
&gt; activation/enforcement?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; At this time we are lucky that our network is very small, so it is<br>
&gt; reasonable to assume that the whole network will upgrade their clients=
<br>
&gt; within a short window (~2 weeks). We would schedule the activation ~2 =
months<br>
&gt; out from when the client is released, just to ensure everyone has time=
 to<br>
&gt; upgrade.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; We have been stuck on the 0.9 code branch and my goal is to bring it u=
p to<br>
&gt; 0.15 at least, so that we can implement Segwit and other key features =
that<br>
&gt; bitcoin has introduced. The 0.15 client currently works with regards t=
o<br>
&gt; sending and receiving transactions but the soft forks are not active. =
I<br>
&gt; understand that activating them will segregate the 0.15 clients onto t=
heir<br>
&gt; own fork, which is why I&#39;d like to understand the repercussions of=
 doing it<br>
&gt; without any signaling beforehand. I also would prefer not to have to m=
ake<br>
&gt; intermediate releases such as 0.10, 0.11.. etc to get the soft forks<b=
r>
&gt; activated.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Another related question - does the block version get bumped up<br>
&gt; automatically at the time that a soft fork activates, or is there addi=
tional<br>
&gt; stuff that I need to do within the code to ensure it bumps up at the s=
ame<br>
&gt; time? From what I saw in the code it appears that it will bump up<br>
&gt; automatically, but I would like some confirmation on that.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Regards,<br>
&gt; Samad<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
</div></div>&gt; ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
&gt; bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
&gt; <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@l=
ists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
&gt; <a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-=
dev" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wb=
r>org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
&gt;<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>

--001a113f2256850efb056886333a--