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
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gavinandresen@gmail.com>) id 1Yz4qZ-0000BN-H8
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 31 May 2015 15:08:19 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.215.52 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.215.52; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com;
helo=mail-la0-f52.google.com;
Received: from mail-la0-f52.google.com ([209.85.215.52])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Yz4qY-0000Oj-MS
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 31 May 2015 15:08:19 +0000
Received: by lagv1 with SMTP id v1so85502419lag.3
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sun, 31 May 2015 08:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.72.164 with SMTP id e4mr13486888lbv.113.1433084892271;
Sun, 31 May 2015 08:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.90.75 with HTTP; Sun, 31 May 2015 08:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDr4G7V5OLfiFq0onGNb3HCWHk9K46FtVcLOVetvxiLqRg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <554BE0E1.5030001@bluematt.me>
<CABsx9T2ysKj5HVbN_7_o33fMehs4KH6E_R583Mt_VPC4gDA0LQ@mail.gmail.com>
<5568F567.3050608@bluematt.me>
<CABsx9T3__mHZ_kseRg-w-x2=8v78QJLhe+BWPezv+hpbFCufpw@mail.gmail.com>
<556A1046.50807@bluematt.me>
<CABsx9T3qPiQ+PL3ZNT+QJzw4ALEzKjMjC4=uEKTG+4vVPdXr-g@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDoE5kbE2cnFzZPAOZbHMdXBaZG7pB7c6dovj=1unPentw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T0SVW9ASBH=Xyet5EKQtjAoJ7nLpAab5_yLQdUo=QpV7w@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDr4G7V5OLfiFq0onGNb3HCWHk9K46FtVcLOVetvxiLqRg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 11:08:12 -0400
Message-ID: <CABsx9T3_MVw6WBv8b35E0+NdJreRTbHHbweckdO=XZu4LRcOEQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2b616efdad905176213df
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(gavinandresen[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
0.0 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
X-Headers-End: 1Yz4qY-0000Oj-MS
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase Requirements
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 15:08:19 -0000
--001a11c2b616efdad905176213df
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@jtimon.cc> wrote=
:
> Whatever...let's use the current subsidies, the same argument applies,
> it's just 20 + 25 =3D 45 btc per block for miner B vs 27 btc for miner B.
> Miner B would still go out of business, bigger blocks still mean more
> mining and validation centralization
>
Sorry, but that's ridiculous.
If Miner B is leaving 18BTC per block on the table because they have bad
connectivity, then they need to pay for better connectivity.
If you are arguing "I should be able to mine on a 56K modem connection from
the middle of the Sahara" then we're going to have to agree to disagree.
So: what is your specific proposal for minimum requirements for
connectivity to run a full node? The 20MB number comes from estimating
costs to run a full node, and as my back-and-forth to Chang Wung shows, the
costs are not excessive.
--=20
--
Gavin Andresen
--001a11c2b616efdad905176213df
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, May 31, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a hre=
f=3D"mailto:jtimon@jtimon.cc" target=3D"_blank">jtimon@jtimon.cc</a>></s=
pan> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex=
;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir=3D"ltr">Whatever...let=
's use the current subsidies, the same argument applies, it's just =
20 + 25 =3D 45 btc per block for miner B vs 27 btc for miner B.<br>
Miner B would still go out of business, bigger blocks still mean more minin=
g and validation centralization</p></blockquote><div>Sorry, but that's =
ridiculous.</div><div><br></div><div>If Miner B is leaving 18BTC per block =
on the table because they have bad connectivity, then they need to pay for =
better connectivity.</div><div><br></div><div>If you are arguing "I sh=
ould be able to mine on a 56K modem connection from the middle of the Sahar=
a" then we're going to have to agree to disagree.</div><div><br></=
div><div>So: what is your specific proposal for minimum requirements for co=
nnectivity to run a full node? The 20MB number comes from estimating costs =
to run a full node, and as my back-and-forth to Chang Wung shows, the costs=
are not excessive.</div><div>=C2=A0</div></div>-- <br><div class=3D"gmail_=
signature">--<br>Gavin Andresen<br></div>
</div></div>
--001a11c2b616efdad905176213df--
|
