Return-Path: <bitcoin@upalc.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA5A48E8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 20 Aug 2015 15:02:08 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-io0-f170.google.com (mail-io0-f170.google.com
[209.85.223.170])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45093110
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 20 Aug 2015 15:02:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by iodv127 with SMTP id v127so48964165iod.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 20 Aug 2015 08:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:content-type;
bh=LhtTGRyWd7/yvCyKUddnY+/pCDYFF7ha0m9Pg4IzDI8=;
b=bVk2gf2vQoLt2/M0IWNa72GEU/hhJI3MU9CAH4aeysRUhjU1lOJ79TG6VT+t3sE5fr
YoEGytg82a3RHmKbkQsSFuC5t4a8JmwUUqo1LP4SDbpvPcIpeTMozl5OBmki8bonS7zx
ztKnJAGUZzvS4WVTfNVRWa5vRKyii+FTw72nWoTLIkEVeIImTND3xFdbQEEkzDlFdZRD
WVdwWa45oKoscPJcd3nblw55RA6JHr13ZnO2heymG2XCBDILrFDnIXuY6O+qsBH1gfpC
6bDU1+Kbw5DteRkKHN87D3woEVxVS/c+5DyO3Ifei4bqG1fYSXKadkak5YcQBv/Hh0Mm
Lgyg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn04lIKSxmERDAPKn7jTGrZmMLt9dYHu/D12yuZ4eQh9AxjWe2KgBWQ/VdUAta0vXQk6K2b
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.46.86 with SMTP id i83mr2858835ioo.121.1440082927232;
Thu, 20 Aug 2015 08:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.107.18.155 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Aug 2015 08:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [115.187.38.4]
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 20:32:07 +0530
Message-ID: <CAED3CWg8cqdQr7SBRU5q6W=QhqE-+DRWf77NpGOvZ0Atk3zocw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Upal Chakraborty <bitcoin@upalc.com>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1137949e5363b7051dbf6fde
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB 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] Dynamically Controlled Bitcoin Block Size Max Cap
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: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 15:02:08 -0000
--001a1137949e5363b7051dbf6fde
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Regarding...
i.
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010493.html
ii.
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010499.html
Could we please keep the conversation specific to the proposal presented at
http://upalc.com/maxblocksize.php ? If you find any demerits to this,
please point them out. Otherwise, I'll ask for a BIP. The proposal in
algorithmic format is as follows...
If more than 50% of block's size, found in the first 2000 of the last
difficulty period, is more than 90% MaxBlockSize
Double MaxBlockSize
Else if more than 90% of block's size, found in the first 2000 of the
last difficulty period, is less than 50% MaxBlockSize
Half MaxBlockSize
Else
Keep the same MaxBlockSize
--001a1137949e5363b7051dbf6fde
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Regarding...<div>i.=C2=A0<a href=3D"http://lists.linuxfoun=
dation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010493.html">http://lists.linu=
xfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010493.html</a></div><div=
>ii.=C2=A0<a href=3D"http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev=
/2015-August/010499.html">http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoi=
n-dev/2015-August/010499.html</a></div><div><br></div><div>Could we please =
keep the conversation specific to the proposal presented at=C2=A0<a href=3D=
"http://upalc.com/maxblocksize.php">http://upalc.com/maxblocksize.php</a> ?=
If you find any demerits to this, please point them out. Otherwise, I'=
ll ask for a BIP. The proposal in algorithmic format is as follows...</div>=
<div><br></div><div><pre style=3D"white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0)">If=
more than 50% of block's size, found in the first 2000 of the last dif=
ficulty period, is more than 90% MaxBlockSize
Double MaxBlockSize
Else if more than 90% of block's size, found in the first 2000 of the l=
ast difficulty period, is less than 50% MaxBlockSize
Half MaxBlockSize
Else
Keep the same MaxBlockSize</pre></div></div>
--001a1137949e5363b7051dbf6fde--