Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 86FD167 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 03:10:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from s47.web-hosting.com (s47.web-hosting.com [199.188.200.16]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E159ADE for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 03:10:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:40188 helo=server47.web-hosting.com) by server47.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1ZL0iQ-003es2-Eh for bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 23:10:34 -0400 Received: from 119.246.245.241 ([119.246.245.241]) by server47.web-hosting.com (Horde Framework) with HTTP; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 03:10:34 +0000 Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 03:10:34 +0000 Message-ID: <20150731031034.Horde.pF0_RVukjyAUe06VAuvqaA1@server47.web-hosting.com> From: jl2012@xbt.hk To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org References: <20150730181450.Horde.mXJp1wMjXROJvXZ_Vhv2RQ2@server47.web-hosting.com> In-Reply-To: <20150730181450.Horde.mXJp1wMjXROJvXZ_Vhv2RQ2@server47.web-hosting.com> User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H5 (6.1.4) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server47.web-hosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.linuxfoundation.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - xbt.hk X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server47.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: jl2012@xbt.hk X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW 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] CORRECTIONS: A summary of block size hardfork proposals X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 03:10:36 -0000 I am making some corrections to my previous summary Currently, there are 4 block size BIP by Bitcoin developers: BIP100 by Jeff: http://gtf.org/garzik/bitcoin/BIP100-blocksizechangeproposal.pdf BIP101 by Gavin: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0101.mediawiki BIP102 by Jeff: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/173/files BIP??? by Pieter (called "BIP103" below): https://gist.github.com/sipa/c65665fc360ca7a176a6 To facilitate further discussion, I'd like to summarize these proposals by a series of questions. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Something like sigop limit are less controversial and are not shown. Should we use a miner voting mechanism to initiate the hardfork? BIP100: Yes, support with 10800 out of last 12000 blocks (90%) BIP101: Yes, support with 750 out of last 1000 blocks (75%) BIP102: No BIP103: No When should we initiate the hardfork? BIP100: 2016-01-11# BIP101: 2 weeks after 75% miner support, but not before 2016-01-11 BIP102: 2015-11-11 BIP103: 2017-01-01 # The network does not actually fork until having 90% miner support What should be the block size at initiation? BIP100: 1MB BIP101: 8MB* BIP102: 2MB BIP103: 1MB * It depends on the exact time of initiation, e.g. 8MB if initiated on 2016-01-11, 16MB if initiated on 2018-01-10. Should we allow further increase / decrease? BIP100: By miner voting, 0.5x - 2x every 12000 blocks (~3 months) BIP101: Double every 2 years, with linear interpolations in between (41.4% p.a.) BIP102: No BIP103: +4.4% every 97 days (double every 4.3 years, or 17.7% p.a.) The earliest date for a >=2MB block? BIP100: 2016-04-03^ BIP101: 2016-01-11 BIP102: 2015-11-11 BIP103: 2020-12-27 ^ Assuming 10 minutes blocks and votes cast before 2016-01-11 are not counted What should be the final block size? BIP100: 32MB is the max, but it is possible to reduce by miner voting BIP101: 8192MB BIP102: 2MB BIP103: 2048MB When should we have the final block size? BIP100: Decided by miners BIP101: 2036-01-06 BIP102: 2015-11-11 BIP103: 2063-07-09