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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1QwH7P-0004mp-5W
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:20:01 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.216.47 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.216.47; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
helo=mail-qw0-f47.google.com;
Received: from mail-qw0-f47.google.com ([209.85.216.47])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1QwH7O-0004GG-FH
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:19:59 +0000
Received: by qwh5 with SMTP id 5so1190377qwh.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Wed, 24 Aug 2011 10:19:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.68.12 with SMTP id t12mr3682002qci.254.1314206392861; Wed,
24 Aug 2011 10:19:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.114.206 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 10:19:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAJ1JLtsxPG9v-Hwdb-pfgY6GU0Z4it+frFzw_tObVbNC6Xgdjw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T1uw43JuvhEmJP0KCyojsDi1r7v6BaLBHz7wWazduE5iw@mail.gmail.com>
<201108241215.36847.luke@dashjr.org>
<CAAS2fgQspsXy1Vw=fNr1FvsDRkEbP6dEcFLgUpK9DrBKXyiWNg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJ1JLtsxPG9v-Hwdb-pfgY6GU0Z4it+frFzw_tObVbNC6Xgdjw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 13:19:52 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgTARAMqMu79Sp4XS4KxmUBWiXebpavHWr-EdLZbxS=sTw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Rick Wesson <rick@support-intelligence.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
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
(gmaxwell[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-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: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1QwH7O-0004GG-FH
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] New standard transaction types: time to
schedule a blockchain split?
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: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:20:01 -0000
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Rick Wesson
<rick@support-intelligence.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wro=
te:
>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
>>
>> > - Replace hard limits (like 1 MB maximum block size) with something th=
at
>> > can
>> > dynamically adapt with the times. Maybe based on difficulty so it can'=
t
>> > be
>> > gamed?
>> Too early for that.
> Could you provide a=C2=A0reference=C2=A0to why in your estimation it is "=
to early."
> =C2=A0Simpy stating this as fact isn't enough to sway demand.
Can you provide a reference to this 'demand' a post by Luke isn't
enough to support the claim of demand.
We're not at maximum size right now (thankfully).
We don't know what the network dynamics would look like at that
traffic level. So how could we competently say what the right metrics
would be to get the right behavior there? Thats what I meant by too
early.
|
