1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
|
Return-Path: <laanwj@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 823B6B1F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 8 Dec 2015 11:07:57 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA129E5
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 8 Dec 2015 11:07:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wmec201 with SMTP id c201so24990416wme.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 08 Dec 2015 03:07:55 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version
:content-type:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding
:in-reply-to; bh=GFTeKCjHwA02GHqMqN8O0stkp6SYhJYSL35c6rj4nd8=;
b=ILwapCF0vvqldpOeZaA4eWSSD1nXfVYfBUSY01PEN+ZIltlOFwmheZb+Gz8edWSI9/
eNcjuhyn+/iw7HtI2oTwHsKjQvGMXpjTIiMsKgTTtGLyMDT6kn2M5256UYPchUb7tfAb
bXh14L2/Pmfzp3WGl/vEC5Gb+iHFEGkuNxL43upl3j2VKVOiuTejuQIiybcB6KW/PCkO
L+9LyOAeHH1lFrUcKgf07fXExvwivl0V1zPI3sfx0Xlu8k4Ls15skOwcxyu3OdrxzMvc
RS6+1KpFvxHVhdez+nThEhUx/Yn5SHLPwKlseS4kgm4LX1CFhSL3XsheGLgzPZNxb9nt
0Y1w==
X-Received: by 10.194.178.70 with SMTP id cw6mr3130370wjc.73.1449572875099;
Tue, 08 Dec 2015 03:07:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from amethyst.visucore.com (dhcp-089-098-228-253.chello.nl.
[89.98.228.253]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
w67sm2947117wmw.17.2015.12.08.03.07.54
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128);
Tue, 08 Dec 2015 03:07:54 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 12:07:53 +0100
From: "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph.org>
Message-ID: <20151208110752.GA31180@amethyst.visucore.com>
References: <CAAS2fgQyVs1fAEj+vqp8E2=FRnqsgs7VUKqALNBHNxRMDsHdVg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgQyVs1fAEj+vqp8E2=FRnqsgs7VUKqALNBHNxRMDsHdVg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM,
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
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Capacity increases for the Bitcoin system.
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: Tue, 08 Dec 2015 11:07:57 -0000
On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 10:02:17PM +0000, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> The Scaling Bitcoin Workshop in HK is just wrapping up. Many fascinating
> proposals were presented. I think this would be a good time to share my
> view of the near term arc for capacity increases in the Bitcoin system. I
> believe we’re in a fantastic place right now and that the community
> is ready to deliver on a clear forward path with a shared vision that
> addresses the needs of the system while upholding its values.
Thanks for writing this up. Putting the progress, ongoing work and plans related
to scaling in context, in one place, was badly needed.
> TL;DR: I propose we work immediately towards the segwit 4MB block
> soft-fork which increases capacity and scalability, and recent speedups
> and incoming relay improvements make segwit a reasonable risk. BIP9
> and segwit will also make further improvements easier and faster to
> deploy. We’ll continue to set the stage for non-bandwidth-increase-based
> scaling, while building additional tools that would make bandwidth
> increases safer long term. Further work will prepare Bitcoin for further
> increases, which will become possible when justified, while also providing
> the groundwork to make them justifiable.
Sounds good to me.
There are multiple ways to get involved in ongoing work, where the community
can help to make this happen sooner:
- Review the versionbits BIP https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0009.mediawiki:
- Compare and test with implementation: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6816
- Review CSV BIPs (BIP68 https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0068.mediawiki /
BIP112 https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0112.mediawiki),
- Compare and test implementation:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6564 BIP-112: Mempool-only CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6312 BIP-68: Mempool-only sequence number constraint verification
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7184 [WIP] Implement SequenceLocks functions for BIP 68
- Segwit BIP is being written, but has not yet been published.
- Gregory linked to an implementation but as he mentions it is not completely
finished yet. ETA for a Segwit testnet is later this month, then you can test as well.
Wladimir
|
