diff options
| author | Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com> | 2015-06-18 15:00:39 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-06-18 22:01:06 +0000 |
| commit | c067e3c27d5ae7e6783b249185641cdda0325b19 (patch) | |
| tree | 94fc2a78803130507aac16f3304a9fc0b10dfd33 | |
| parent | 553b7235cc3283680b502e360ea246cbba2b1bba (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-c067e3c27d5ae7e6783b249185641cdda0325b19.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-c067e3c27d5ae7e6783b249185641cdda0325b19.zip | |
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Mining centralization pressure from non-uniform propagation speed
| -rw-r--r-- | 69/c121b11380ecccfacf25b2913ba158935b8562 | 139 |
1 files changed, 139 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/69/c121b11380ecccfacf25b2913ba158935b8562 b/69/c121b11380ecccfacf25b2913ba158935b8562 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..13b98cbf6 --- /dev/null +++ b/69/c121b11380ecccfacf25b2913ba158935b8562 @@ -0,0 +1,139 @@ +Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] + helo=mx.sourceforge.net) + by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) + (envelope-from <tomh@thinlink.com>) id 1Z5hru-0005h7-L7 + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Thu, 18 Jun 2015 22:01:06 +0000 +X-ACL-Warn: +Received: from mail-pd0-f174.google.com ([209.85.192.174]) + by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) + (Exim 4.76) id 1Z5hrr-0007NZ-KO + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Thu, 18 Jun 2015 22:01:06 +0000 +Received: by pdjn11 with SMTP id n11so75357732pdj.0 + for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; + Thu, 18 Jun 2015 15:00:57 -0700 (PDT) +X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=1e100.net; s=20130820; + h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to + :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type + :content-transfer-encoding; + bh=w+DWrcCfoY76r4PEJi1035yOwob7Gu7JIridxT6Gaio=; + b=MunTNS4hg61Anc4PGix1OaPzH+zPikVt9SQf9IJquAlIF1gR8ubqqR7j8843+X/B+y + SF9YAU201C8rZFwDLbTuoNo52LFTk/Z2n2RN4glJFeYeSC83MmzlDQ0ISActahWdXj48 + rV8DUgqp4XMrkS9fnKKnLQbMuMGBoGBgMIVrUTo68nm1I81NPameZOzcioxCWA7OaykH + O2ZIq0+dVoH9c+RV4Fjt5FceuoG7FZYYYyBLwC6P8sqpzihsPeTAykq3SuwJoahvpIU/ + gP0NAsM4ZDKV7hpF3XeKUyCCpVzjNkG4lFRA/6xLPRkObiPx37ED3ANqW4Z9aR1mi0ZY + ih5A== +X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm92nB4FWDMofKa8O1DjMQEOxmzUH5NJI7KNir3pMIXiBZAjty/eC08esEGKrnh6sJQ7p4A +X-Received: by 10.68.87.35 with SMTP id u3mr25029378pbz.127.1434664857839; + Thu, 18 Jun 2015 15:00:57 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from [10.100.1.239] ([204.58.254.99]) + by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id qa1sm9087370pab.0.2015.06.18.15.00.55 + (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); + Thu, 18 Jun 2015 15:00:56 -0700 (PDT) +Message-ID: <55833F87.3090408@thinlink.com> +Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 15:00:39 -0700 +From: Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com> +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; + rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com> +References: <CAPg+sBi5fYHGLv4wtWbWE7jov8CX=q9UX=vhxDVepG6JfX30+g@mail.gmail.com> + <557DBDCC.5040106@student.ethz.ch> +In-Reply-To: <557DBDCC.5040106@student.ethz.ch> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Spam-Score: 0.6 (/) +X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. + See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. + 0.6 RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB RBL: SORBS: sender is an abusable web server + [204.58.254.99 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] +X-Headers-End: 1Z5hrr-0007NZ-KO +Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net +Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Mining centralization pressure from + non-uniform propagation speed +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 +Precedence: list +List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 22:01:06 -0000 + +On 06/12/2015 06:51 PM, Pieter Wuille wrote: +>> However, it does very clearly show the effects of +>> larger blocks on centralization pressure of the system. + +On 6/14/2015 10:45 AM, Jonas Nick wrote: +> This means that your scenario is not the result of a cartel but the result of a long-term network partition. +> + +Pieter, to Jonas' point, in your scenario the big miners are all part of +the majority partition, so "centralization pressure" (pressure to merge +with a big miner) cannot be separated from "pressure to be connected to +the majority partition". + +I ran your simulation with a large (20%) miner in a 20% minority +partition, and 16 small (5%) miners in a majority 80% partition, well +connected. The starting point was your recent update, which had a more +realistic "slow link" speed of 100 Mbit/s (making all of the effects +smaller). + +To summarize the results across both your run and mine: + +** Making small blocks when others are making big ones -> BAD +** As above, and fees are enormous -> VERY BAD + +** Being separated by a slow link from majority hash power -> BAD + +** Being a small miner with blocksize=20MB -> *NOT BAD* + + +Configuration: + * Miner group 0: 20.000000% hashrate, blocksize 20000000.000000 + * Miner group 1: 80.000000% hashrate, blocksize 1000000.000000 + * Expected average block size: 4800000.000000 + * Average fee per block: 0.250000 + * Fee per byte: 0.0000000521 +Result: + * Miner group 0: 20.404704% income (factor 1.020235 with hashrate) + * Miner group 1: 79.595296% income (factor 0.994941 with hashrate) + +Configuration: + * Miner group 0: 20.000000% hashrate, blocksize 20000000.000000 + * Miner group 1: 80.000000% hashrate, blocksize 20000000.000000 + * Expected average block size: 20000000.000000 + * Average fee per block: 0.250000 + * Fee per byte: 0.0000000125 +Result: + * Miner group 0: 19.864232% income (factor 0.993212 with hashrate) + * Miner group 1: 80.135768% income (factor 1.001697 with hashrate) + +Configuration: + * Miner group 0: 20.000000% hashrate, blocksize 20000000.000000 + * Miner group 1: 80.000000% hashrate, blocksize 1000000.000000 + * Expected average block size: 4800000.000000 + * Average fee per block: 25.000000 + * Fee per byte: 0.0000052083 +Result: + * Miner group 0: 51.316895% income (factor 2.565845 with hashrate) + * Miner group 1: 48.683105% income (factor 0.608539 with hashrate) + +Configuration: + * Miner group 0: 20.000000% hashrate, blocksize 20000000.000000 + * Miner group 1: 80.000000% hashrate, blocksize 20000000.000000 + * Expected average block size: 20000000.000000 + * Average fee per block: 25.000000 + * Fee per byte: 0.0000012500 +Result: + * Miner group 0: 19.865943% income (factor 0.993297 with hashrate) + * Miner group 1: 80.134057% income (factor 1.001676 with hashrate) + + + |