Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 581F18DC for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:53:32 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-pg0-f48.google.com (mail-pg0-f48.google.com [74.125.83.48]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF536CD for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:53:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg0-f48.google.com with SMTP id n5so75909111pgh.0 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 13:53:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=8Z+Gy+gJXwZ3rSV0eg8E0sr9rt4YJ9KiNnctHwBUiaE=; b=EGaeGdvO1gBcJpQe4W/5k8GFcpmZontG6e1QE/PPMWHFO5k458eEQ9WFHxQtcfMzKU v5eIPpSESPizPj2fs77MTPlK10UVhWfj8KNmtC1IczJxJpmLtwo6vdzB3+826HErDGGZ ZZ2MY+j+/O/+jm3nZYYXUIiFtTjw9ilbcCGqxkjkt3bTtyVGvpfdCxOVrP6jfxfHlTsZ 2FF+tZtCyaNACRVoSGFL5t++9/Fl8TpyAnYcZw7EEIj4RbUErmh3GMmo5qSPLqGWpxIM ol9K0kJFfWsU2q+xqNnxD04J136Va/bstGJvMFl+hK5t3e5gl8BNW+93iRwtecxCWaku lO0w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=8Z+Gy+gJXwZ3rSV0eg8E0sr9rt4YJ9KiNnctHwBUiaE=; b=tbxzCi9/aqmqsa617ppTmOr9bhMR+vy9DUnWegwp8WVg5ZVduu4wqvbOPNqnJ8aJBY Gn7CRxew6o9gtU4VV9N0ZBHVeYLALcUTf+s0ihG9T9GlZrzaCW36M9YLIkRgmcJhz24n gmqfpCYWSYRkjBg/pvNsDjbkjDmslOK7jeaAiw3TsqpaUvcg8c11KwEjo8j23q76Rb2m r7fw+7ubLXqKWC8dQ8HPZdMXpOoAXK2JwfRR60bdUv6QQp1auhrlnx7UL9bVOljOVSjq orP9lSKYOjqSlYyImaMyQSwVITkIfAAk6EtAkLwT9SfOd0a8CZ3gcxnTU8Ve8O2lNq+M CNPg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1tEYM9Zy6x9L01kkZ6mpaYcXM95oi2oWMWYGW+WgIwkk8icT4fOVm1bkQYknQl54POrP62beVG1Jp5jg== X-Received: by 10.98.157.148 with SMTP id a20mr34263837pfk.144.1490734411483; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 13:53:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.128.19 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 13:53:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <10740865.BWG7G26IGS@cherry> References: <10740865.BWG7G26IGS@cherry> From: Alphonse Pace Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:53:30 -0500 Message-ID: To: Tom Zander , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c1165060d0dbf054bd0a708 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Hard fork proposal from last week's meeting X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:53:32 -0000 --94eb2c1165060d0dbf054bd0a708 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 His demand (not suggestion) allows it without any safeguards. >This patch must be in the immediate next release of Bitcoin Core. That is not a suggestion. Wang - still waiting on the details of this meeting. In the spirit of openness, I think you ought to share with the community what kind of secret meetings are happening. On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Tuesday, 28 March 2017 21:56:49 CEST Paul Iverson via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > It is clear that, spam aside, blocks are getting full and we need > increase > > them soon. What I don't like about your proposal is it forces all node > > operators to implicitly accept larger blocks in 2020, even maybe against > > their will. 32 MB blocks might result in a loss of decentralization, and > > it might be too difficult to coordinate for small blocks before it's too > > late. > > The suggestion was not to produce 32MB blocks, so your fear here is > unfounded. > > -- > Tom Zander > Blog: https://zander.github.io > Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > --94eb2c1165060d0dbf054bd0a708 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
His demand (not suggestion) allows it without any safeguar= ds.

>This patch must= be=C2=A0in the immediate next rele= ase of Bitcoin Core.

=
That is not a suggestion= .

Wang - still waitin= g on the details of this meeting.=C2=A0 In the spirit of openness, I think = you ought to share with the community what kind of secret meetings are happ= ening.

<= /div>

On Tue, Mar = 28, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev <bitco= in-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
On Tuesday, 28 March 2017 21:56:49 CEST Paul= Iverson via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> It is clear that, spam aside, blocks are getting full and we need incr= ease
> them soon. What I don't like about your proposal is it forces all = node
> operators to implicitly accept larger blocks in 2020, even maybe again= st
> their will. 32 MB blocks might result in a loss of decentralization, a= nd
> it might be too difficult to coordinate for small blocks before it'= ;s too
> late.

The suggestion was not to produce 32MB blocks, so your fear here is<= br> unfounded.

--
Tom Zander
Blog: https://zander.github.io
Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel<= /a>
_____________________= __________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.= linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org= /mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

--94eb2c1165060d0dbf054bd0a708--