MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGCNRJqEVo6cMOLeENNue3=2mAHnWL2ViUKXVXAke_W0CXKKEg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGCNRJqdu7DMC+AMR4mYKRAYStRMKVGqbnjtEfmzcoeMij5u=A@mail.gmail.com>
	<c318f76d-0904-2e1b-453b-60179f8209bb@sky-ip.org>
	<CAGCNRJrLM2ZR9qCvuNfyr2mUk50szzHnG-crmpv_3cH=xGxYOg@mail.gmail.com>
	<d691b6f8-0c15-d293-0027-dcce145fbe8e@sky-ip.org>
	<CAGCNRJo_VE9nBhP=oY7hV0UJ-OSuTBxu+Tf28_utJW8qi7rzxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADvTj4rC6OyCFCwpExRdRF_ZVU_ONjtb3PycR3T_fkm6d=b_Wg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGCNRJqEVo6cMOLeENNue3=2mAHnWL2ViUKXVXAke_W0CXKKEg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bram Cohen <bram@bittorrent.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:53:46 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+KqGkqwfkKRBcmk78O_Ki9BdinG=p68+LEN_i4E5jLmfvCd6w@mail.gmail.com>
To: "t. khan" <teekhan42@gmail.com>, 
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113eb2c290547e0543690540
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Managing block size the same way we do difficulty
 (aka Block75)
Precedence: list

--001a113eb2c290547e0543690540
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 1:40 PM, t. khan via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

>
> Block75 is not exponential scaling. It's true the max theoretical increase
> in the first year would be 7x, but the next year would be a max of 2x, and
> the next could only increase by 50% and so on.
>

With those limits there's very little reason to not simply have a fixed
schedule. Blocks are likely to all be full in the future anyway, with a
real fee market, and the idea that miners will be held back on block sizes
for worry about propagation delay is a myth, and even if it were true it
would favor collective pooling a lot, which would be a very bad thing.

--001a113eb2c290547e0543690540
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On S=
un, Dec 11, 2016 at 1:40 PM, t. khan via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;=
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote =
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid=
;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote"><div>Block75 is not exponential scaling. It&#39;s true t=
he max theoretical increase in the first year would be 7x, but the next yea=
r would be a max of 2x, and the next could only increase by 50% and so on.<=
/div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>With those limits t=
here&#39;s very little reason to not simply have a fixed schedule. Blocks a=
re likely to all be full in the future anyway, with a real fee market, and =
the idea that miners will be held back on block sizes for worry about propa=
gation delay is a myth, and even if it were true it would favor collective =
pooling a lot, which would be a very bad thing.</div></div></div></div>

--001a113eb2c290547e0543690540--