blob: 14c7fc94de1c7aef90c455ab948124564ec2c153 (
plain)
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
|
Return-Path: <luke@dashjr.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB4B8B7D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 12 May 2017 19:23:00 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [192.3.11.21])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BDD21AC
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 12 May 2017 19:23:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown
[IPv6:2001:470:5:265:a45d:823b:2d27:961c])
(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5561038A0081
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 12 May 2017 19:22:58 +0000 (UTC)
X-Hashcash: 1:25:170512:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::0hoKDosS2G1+E2da:hfVg
From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 19:22:56 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.9.16-gentoo; KDE/4.14.29; x86_64; ; )
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F
X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F
X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201705121922.57445.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,
RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] BIP: Block signal enforcement via tx fees
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: Fri, 12 May 2017 19:23:00 -0000
I've written a new BIP draft for OP_CHECKBLOCKVERSION to allow the community
to put economic pressure on miners to deploy softforks without the extreme of
a UASF.
https://github.com/luke-jr/bips/blob/bip-cbv/bip-cbv.mediawiki
Due to the potential for miners to maliciously block this softfork, it is
suggested that we deploy it using BIP 8 to ensure it eventually activates even
if encountering hostility.
This is intended to be an alternative to BIP 8 in the long term.
It is NOT intended to make BIP 148 obsolete, given the timeframes involved.
An implementation is available (based on top of BIP 115's implementation):
https://github.com/luke-jr/bitcoin/compare/cbah...luke-jr:checkblockversion
Luke
|
