To: Tom Zander <tomz@freedommail.ch>,
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
References: <CAPg+sBjdyJ297-GZvVc-wQwCEX-cRAGTNWDd92SgVzdCcD_ZMw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1782741.nelbyupFSb@strawberry>
	<CABsx9T2sWKFKpRYsjcgcdef+nL7X9-4+3H10hAy1FsXaax38Og@mail.gmail.com>
	<1476639436.uo9cdjJaci@strawberry>
From: Matt Corallo <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com>
Message-ID: <5803B33B.2090809@mattcorallo.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 17:04:59 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/38.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1476639436.uo9cdjJaci@strawberry>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] On the security of soft forks
Precedence: list

I highly recommend you read the excellent thread on soft fork risks at
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-December/012014.html
and respond there instead of getting off topic for this thread.

Matt

On 10/16/16 16:42, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> On Sunday, 16 October 2016 12:35:58 CEST Gavin Andresen wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev <
>>
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>> The fallow period sounds waaaay to short. I suggest 2 months at minimum
>>> since anyone that wants to be safe needs to upgrade.
>>
>> I asked a lot of businesses and individuals how long it would take them to
>> upgrade to a new release over the last year or two.
>>
>> Nobody said it would take them more than two weeks.
> 
> The question you asked them was likely about the block size. The main 
> difference is that SPV users do not need to update after BIP109, but they do 
> need to have a new wallet when SegWit transactions are being sent to them.
> 
> This upgrade affects also end users, not just businesses etc.
> 
> Personally, I'd say that 2 months is even too fast.
>  
>