Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 16:41:30 -0600
From: Troy Benjegerdes <hozer@hozed.org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Message-ID: <20131217224130.GC3180@nl.grid.coop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] RFC: MERGE transaction/script/process for
	forked chains
Precedence: list

I want to get some feedback.. I've used distributed version control 
systems for a long time, and the most useful feature is to be able
to merge two different forks.

So what's the equivalent of this for Bitcoin or other crypto-currencies?

Let's suppose that me and my friends get 'islanded' from the rest of
the internet for a week, but we still want to trade bitcoin. It would
work if there are local miners, until we reconnect.

Suppose we have the main chain (Alice), while bob is on a boat, trading
with some friends, but has no network connectivity.

When bob reconnects with Alice, a 'Merge' transaction happens where a 
miner looks at bob's forked blockchain, sees no double-spends, and 
includes BOTH chains.

Now suppose someone on bob's boat has a buggy client, or sent a 
transaction before disconnect that results in a double-spend on the 
merge.

So we have a merge conflict, which generally requires human interaction,
so bob and his friends broadcast a MERGE request with a transaction fee
sufficient to cover reconciling the double-spends, AND incentivize a 
miner to do some extra work to merge.

Thoughts everyone?

-- Troy