path: root/09/904e920704a242c5a45006620395564188dee1

Return-Path: <jeremy.l.rubin@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 408C4C002C
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:20:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28058610E1
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:20:30 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.098
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, BITCOIN_OBFU_SUBJ=1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
 DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1,
 FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001,
 SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
 dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id tp9N2ZLYLg5Z
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:20:29 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-lf1-x12b.google.com (mail-lf1-x12b.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12b])
 by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF70B60A77
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:20:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-lf1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id d6so6849512lfv.9
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Wed, 20 Apr 2022 23:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
 h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :cc; bh=GgTYdBlzyihQu9JzwVAUXfPweRQZtCfZWQo/WdC/lok=;
 b=Z2s84JFlatt25aon+o2GcmdJRP+fNtCfFlLuYJP3xLj4Js586CRA0lguwDPoIHxiQi
 JMHXXqYbDxDUsVMWGGiJOig4aftuhuTE2UECHnX5O+/O/0QFaUbNf15KtYfVbJdX1aI6
 LtnKoGWYjuw+YHqFeNSvxmeD1A2Vzs/qiwlaR/GDd2Kxk2iHFQgqtMMrxs2w9wxraqku
 i7/zgxauhbQ8iNq9f+gQgFYNcxMGmRK5LMth+nWlqukqsr7zTX2ujVeNph9mQCJd04lH
 jfkKSiTX99lsR6VlMw9XoqGYljaqVQ9ZzYH+rJ0s+eyF7wwclG3U6/ROVKckHrW3AqVg
 QSMQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=GgTYdBlzyihQu9JzwVAUXfPweRQZtCfZWQo/WdC/lok=;
 b=d2P+SX356zhK71GFkzjYUgS4UVjSwWSNB+UKLkJarYyBVKTCnIEwqH+Qx+j92G+shG
 R5m9EFZvut29X1BKGslqIBXEa4z7B89kROhAElYA6w7G0xrgCx3YuXaq7vitBuWD6ayV
 5Op6pY+8NTuUDjH//Tn+02DbUzBUmgamNpZm4e235/5dRBwv3tNtY+ZixDCvj2VWLnBk
 +Lziw62OQ+2bqI+pxnIL5LSgaIET1FnRxAXg4/f87Df+N0JQ8Qurxr2VQm2kB7i4Hkkp
 x/d41aWS+JYAU0Rj9IfOHfm7ItLpYfq1nx+Pp2AuswoVpse2ByFbcsulTeeQkn2FDPxA
 KDqg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532biUbR9Z7PUpZgg8rP9EQGWJNZW3tGXz+W1RNezLPNn/kC6adH
 vopF/Mp1qFflUB3DT4xmEAhN2rx6NvoLFAcMEJ0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyM/rA5IatQZcBQskVZxUtFPDVzTYlcYkD3qFuIQaCmU3Xa1BlrlXvrRLbw4JMh1rIY9oeZFd1Mr6YLhhiPbCg=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:1112:b0:471:a77b:abe6 with SMTP id
 l18-20020a056512111200b00471a77babe6mr8362571lfg.262.1650522026656; Wed, 20
 Apr 2022 23:20:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <64a34b4d46461da322be51b53ec2eb01@dtrt.org>
 <202204210205.47678.luke@dashjr.org>
 <R95icCQeG6oNu4uNppxVTceaMmZzOQhUD40HhOXkuQCOzUY_P5uM1F1AGBejdydrSjl4RYE538VWiDHeGx3YcaS0S-z_q9v5UaCK_Y4b5TE=@protonmail.com>
 <202204210556.54781.luke@dashjr.org>
In-Reply-To: <202204210556.54781.luke@dashjr.org>
From: Jeremy Rubin <jeremy.l.rubin@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 01:20:15 -0500
Message-ID: <CAD5xwhjGzWDw=dunVM5ZW8OvYCHb6xsXBw-ecwx6WAQq84sx5w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>, 
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000017c76705dd241b60"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Automatically reverting ("transitory") soft forks,
 e.g. for CTV
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:20:30 -0000

--00000000000017c76705dd241b60
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

> While reverting Segwit wouldn't be possible, it IS entirely possible to
do an
> additional softfork to either weigh witness data at the full 4 WU/Byte
rate
> (same as other data), or to reduce the total weight limit so as to extend
the
> witness discount to non-segwit transactions (so scriptSig is similarly
> discounted).

What if I pre signed a transaction which was valid under the discounted
weighting, but the increase in weight would make it invalid? This would
serve to confiscate funds. Let's not do that.



> Furthermore, the variant of Speedy Trial being used (AFAIK) is the BIP9
> variant which has no purpose other than to try to sabotage parallel UASF
> efforts.

Why didn't you upstream the code that was used for the actual activation
into Bitcoin Core in the last year?

In preparing it I just used what was available in Core now, surely the last
year you could have gotten the appropriate patches done?


--
@JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 12:57 AM Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Thursday 21 April 2022 03:10:02 alicexbt wrote:
> > @DavidHarding
> >
> > Interesting proposal to revert consensus changes. Is it possible to do
> this
> > for soft forks that are already activated?
>
> Generally, no. Reverting a softfork without a built-in expiry would be a
> hardfork.
>
> > Example: Some users are not okay with witness discount in segwit
> > transactions
> >
> > https://nitter.net/giacomozucco/status/1513614380121927682
>
> While reverting Segwit wouldn't be possible, it IS entirely possible to do
> an
> additional softfork to either weigh witness data at the full 4 WU/Byte
> rate
> (same as other data), or to reduce the total weight limit so as to extend
> the
> witness discount to non-segwit transactions (so scriptSig is similarly
> discounted).
>
> > @LukeDashjr
> >
> > > The bigger issue with CTV is the miner-decision route. Either CTV has
> > > community support, or it doesn't. If it does, miners shouldn't have the
> > > ability to veto it. If it doesn't, miners shouldn't have the ability to
> > > activate it (making it a 51% attack more than a softfork).
> >
> > Agree. UASF client compatible with this speedy trial release for BIP 119
> > could be a better way to activate CTV. Users can decide if they prefer
> > mining pools to make the decision for them or they want to enforce it
> > irrespective of how many mining pools signal for it. I haven't seen any
> > arguments against CTV from mining pools yet.
>
> We had that for Taproot, and now certain people are trying to say Speedy
> Trial
> activated Taproot rather than the BIP8 client, and otherwise creating
> confusion and ambiguity.
>
> Furthermore, the variant of Speedy Trial being used (AFAIK) is the BIP9
> variant which has no purpose other than to try to sabotage parallel UASF
> efforts.
>
> At this point, it is probably better for any Speedy Trial attempts to be
> rejected by the community and fail outright. Perhaps even preparing a real
> counter-softfork to invalidate blocks signalling for it.
>
> Luke
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>

--00000000000017c76705dd241b60
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,he=
lvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#000000">&gt;=C2=A0<span style=3D"=
font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;color:rgb(34,34,34)">While reverting=
 Segwit wouldn&#39;t be possible, it IS entirely possible to do an</span><s=
pan style=3D"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;color:rgb(34,34,34)">=
=C2=A0</span></div><span class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial=
,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">&gt; </span>additio=
nal softfork to either weigh witness data at the full 4 WU/Byte rate<span>=
=C2=A0</span><br><span class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,h=
elvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">&gt; </span>(same as =
other data), or to reduce the total weight limit so as to extend the<span>=
=C2=A0</span><br><span class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,h=
elvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">&gt; </span>witness d=
iscount to non-segwit transactions (so scriptSig is similarly<span>=C2=A0</=
span><br><span class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica=
,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">&gt; </span>discounted).<br><=
div><br></div><div><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,=
helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">What if I pre signed=
 a transaction which was valid under the discounted weighting, but the incr=
ease in weight would make it invalid? This would serve to confiscate funds.=
 Let&#39;s not do that.</div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><=
span class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-seri=
f;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">&gt; </span>Furthermore, the variant of=
 Speedy Trial being used (AFAIK) is the BIP9<span>=C2=A0</span><br><span cl=
ass=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-=
size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">&gt; </span>variant which has no purpose other=
 than to try to sabotage parallel UASF<span>=C2=A0</span><br><span class=3D=
"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:s=
mall;color:rgb(0,0,0)">&gt; </span>efforts.<br></div><div><br></div><div><d=
iv class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;=
font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Why didn&#39;t you upstream the code that=
 was used for the actual activation into Bitcoin Core in the last year?</di=
v><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-se=
rif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default=
" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb=
(0,0,0)">In preparing it I just used what was available in Core now, surely=
 the last year you could have gotten the appropriate patches done?</div><br=
></div><br clear=3D"all"><div><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_signature" da=
ta-smartmail=3D"gmail_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr">--<br><a href=3D"https://=
twitter.com/JeremyRubin" target=3D"_blank">@JeremyRubin</a><br></div></div>=
</div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_=
attr">On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 12:57 AM Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a h=
ref=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitc=
oin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;bo=
rder-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">=
On Thursday 21 April 2022 03:10:02 alicexbt wrote:<br>
&gt; @DavidHarding<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Interesting proposal to revert consensus changes. Is it possible to do=
 this<br>
&gt; for soft forks that are already activated?<br>
<br>
Generally, no. Reverting a softfork without a built-in expiry would be a <b=
r>
hardfork.<br>
<br>
&gt; Example: Some users are not okay with witness discount in segwit<br>
&gt; transactions<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; <a href=3D"https://nitter.net/giacomozucco/status/1513614380121927682"=
 rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://nitter.net/giacomozucco/statu=
s/1513614380121927682</a><br>
<br>
While reverting Segwit wouldn&#39;t be possible, it IS entirely possible to=
 do an <br>
additional softfork to either weigh witness data at the full 4 WU/Byte rate=
 <br>
(same as other data), or to reduce the total weight limit so as to extend t=
he <br>
witness discount to non-segwit transactions (so scriptSig is similarly <br>
discounted).<br>
<br>
&gt; @LukeDashjr<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; The bigger issue with CTV is the miner-decision route. Either CTV=
 has<br>
&gt; &gt; community support, or it doesn&#39;t. If it does, miners shouldn&=
#39;t have the<br>
&gt; &gt; ability to veto it. If it doesn&#39;t, miners shouldn&#39;t have =
the ability to<br>
&gt; &gt; activate it (making it a 51% attack more than a softfork).<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Agree. UASF client compatible with this speedy trial release for BIP 1=
19<br>
&gt; could be a better way to activate CTV. Users can decide if they prefer=
<br>
&gt; mining pools to make the decision for them or they want to enforce it<=
br>
&gt; irrespective of how many mining pools signal for it. I haven&#39;t see=
n any<br>
&gt; arguments against CTV from mining pools yet.<br>
<br>
We had that for Taproot, and now certain people are trying to say Speedy Tr=
ial <br>
activated Taproot rather than the BIP8 client, and otherwise creating <br>
confusion and ambiguity.<br>
<br>
Furthermore, the variant of Speedy Trial being used (AFAIK) is the BIP9 <br=
>
variant which has no purpose other than to try to sabotage parallel UASF <b=
r>
efforts.<br>
<br>
At this point, it is probably better for any Speedy Trial attempts to be <b=
r>
rejected by the community and fail outright. Perhaps even preparing a real =
<br>
counter-softfork to invalidate blocks signalling for it.<br>
<br>
Luke<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>

--00000000000017c76705dd241b60--