Return-Path: <jrn@jrn.me.uk>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61F3740A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 17 Jul 2015 19:13:15 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from homiemail-a61.g.dreamhost.com (homie.mail.dreamhost.com
[208.97.132.208])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC04A136
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 17 Jul 2015 19:13:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from homiemail-a61.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by homiemail-a61.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38B82578078
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 17 Jul 2015 12:13:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=jrn.me.uk; h=subject:to
:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version:in-reply-to:
content-type; s=jrn.me.uk; bh=N4ddyiKEYPvY2QirLWVOit1EbFo=; b=HJ
kRK7+3DyKdlhgqd3XNcxf2yRzH/O3dF7A68y5G/vQcyEytOj6X+adHva1Mb9AN3e
J3gEQOA2rJR8i4idbINocaPoFSgasliHxv2qZYOZMt4IxfdTpu+yO7TU7FIIsyFm
ik6e/nMmoDM0qiUY/fr0sHqSEJ0RZCT3ZwHVV1PHI=
Received: from [10.9.1.131] (unknown [89.238.129.18])
(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
(Authenticated sender: jrn@jrn.me.uk)
by homiemail-a61.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9ABC557806E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 17 Jul 2015 12:13:13 -0700 (PDT)
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <CADm_WcZKoMAhYvXbFMbE+5K9HOD75YkQu8_qTW4S6YN6ZMrfjA@mail.gmail.com>
<55A9421B.6040605@jrn.me.uk>
<CAEieSeQs4OmyKr4AMcXhZfRccwPApzNJyd06yhRTOjYywsVLsQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ross Nicoll <jrn@jrn.me.uk>
Message-ID: <55A953CA.7020701@jrn.me.uk>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 20:13:14 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/38.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAEieSeQs4OmyKr4AMcXhZfRccwPApzNJyd06yhRTOjYywsVLsQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------000807080405030507060300"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HTML_MESSAGE,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] BIP 102 - kick the can down the road to 2MB
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: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 19:13:15 -0000
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------000807080405030507060300
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I'll leave others to comment on whether we can get consensus on that,
but your years listed are inconsistent with everything else you've
written. Should be:
block 400,000 = 2MB (2016)
block 500,000 = 4MB (2018)
block 600,000 = 8MB (2020)
On 17/07/2015 20:06, Chris Wardell via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I would prefer a dynamic solution that did not necessitate a second
> hard fork down the road.
>
> I propose doubling the block size every 100k blocks (~2 years)
>
> block 400,000 = 2MB (2016)
> block 500,000 = 4MB (2017)
> block 600,000 = 8MB (2018)
>
> Chris
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Ross Nicoll via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
>
> I'd back this if we can't find a permanent solution - 2MB gives us
> a lot more wiggle room in the interim at least; one of my concerns
> with block size is 3 transactions per second is absolutely tiny,
> and we need space for the network to search for an equilibrium
> between volume and pricing without risk of an adoption spike
> rendering it essentially unusable.
>
> I'd favour switching over by block height rather than time, and
> I'd suggest that given virtually every wallet/node out there will
> require testing (even if many do not currently enforce a limit and
> therefore do not need changing), 6 months should be considered a
> minimum target. I'd open with a suggestion of block 390k as a target.
>
> Ross
>
>
> On 17/07/2015 16:55, Jeff Garzik via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> Opening a mailing list thread on this BIP:
>>
>> BIP PR: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/173
>> Code PR: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6451
>>
>> The general intent of this BIP is as a minimum viable alternative
>> plan to my preferred proposal (BIP 100).
>>
>> If agreement is not reached on a more comprehensive solution,
>> then this solution is at least available and a known quantity. A
>> good backup plan.
>>
>> Benefits: conservative increase. proves network can upgrade.
>> permits some added growth, while the community & market gathers
>> data on how an increased block size impacts privacy, security,
>> centralization, transaction throughput and other metrics. 2MB
>> seems to be a Least Common Denominator on an increase.
>>
>> Costs: requires a hard fork. requires another hard fork down
>> the road.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--------------000807080405030507060300
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html>
<head>
<meta content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252"
http-equiv=3D"Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF" text=3D"#000000">
I'll leave others to comment on whether we can get consensus on
that, but your years listed are inconsistent with everything else
you've written. Should be:<br>
<br>
block 400,000 =3D 2MB (2016)<br>
block 500,000 =3D 4MB (2018)<br>
block 600,000 =3D 8MB (2020)<br>
<br>
<div class=3D"moz-cite-prefix">On 17/07/2015 20:06, Chris Wardell via
bitcoin-dev wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite=3D"mid:CAEieSeQs4OmyKr4AMcXhZfRccwPApzNJyd06yhRTOjYywsVLsQ@mail.gmai=
l.com"
type=3D"cite">
<div dir=3D"ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>I would prefer a dynamic solution that did not
necessitate a second hard fork down the road.<br>
<br>
</div>
I propose doubling the block size every 100k blocks (~2
years)<br>
<br>
</div>
block 400,000 =3D 2MB (2016)<br>
</div>
block 500,000 =3D 4MB (2017)<br>
</div>
block 600,000 =3D 8MB (2018)<br>
<br>
</div>
Chris<br>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Ross
Nicoll via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send=3D"true"
href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org"
target=3D"_blank"><a class=3D"moz-txt-link-abbreviated" hre=
f=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linu=
xfoundation.org</a></a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF" text=3D"#000000"> I'd back this if w=
e
can't find a permanent solution - 2MB gives us a lot more
wiggle room in the interim at least; one of my concerns
with block size is 3 transactions per second is absolutely
tiny, and we need space for the network to search for an
equilibrium between volume and pricing without risk of an
adoption spike rendering it essentially unusable.<br>
<br>
I'd favour switching over by block height rather than
time, and I'd suggest that given virtually every
wallet/node out there will require testing (even if many
do not currently enforce a limit and therefore do not need
changing), 6 months should be considered a minimum target.
I'd open with a suggestion of block 390k as a target.<br>
<br>
Ross
<div>
<div class=3D"h5"><br>
<br>
<div>On 17/07/2015 16:55, Jeff Garzik via bitcoin-dev
wrote:<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote type=3D"cite">
<div>
<div class=3D"h5">
<div dir=3D"ltr">
<div>Opening a mailing list thread on this BIP:</di=
v>
<div><br>
</div>
BIP PR:=A0<a moz-do-not-send=3D"true"
href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/173"
target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/bitcoin/bips=
/pull/173</a>
<div>Code PR:=A0<a moz-do-not-send=3D"true"
href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull=
/6451"
target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/bitcoin/bi=
tcoin/pull/6451</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The general intent of this BIP is as a
minimum viable alternative plan to my preferred
proposal (BIP 100).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If agreement is not reached on a more
comprehensive solution, then this solution is at
least available and a known quantity.=A0 A good
backup plan.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Benefits: =A0conservative increase. =A0proves
network can upgrade. =A0permits some added growth=
,
while the community & market gathers data on
how an increased block size impacts privacy,
security, centralization, transaction throughput
and other metrics. =A02MB seems to be a Least
Common Denominator on an increase.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Costs: =A0requires a hard fork. =A0requires
another hard fork down the road.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<span class=3D"">
<pre>_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send=3D"true" href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundat=
ion.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send=3D"true" href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mai=
lman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundatio=
n.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a>
</pre>
</span></blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send=3D"true"
href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitco=
in-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send=3D"true"
href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/=
bitcoin-dev"
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfou=
ndation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class=3D"mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap=3D"">_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
<a class=3D"moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.li=
nuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>
<a class=3D"moz-txt-link-freetext" href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.=
org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailm=
an/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------000807080405030507060300--