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
126
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pete@petertodd.org>) id 1YqlH1-0007tz-0p
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 08 May 2015 16:37:15 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
designates 62.13.149.82 as permitted sender)
client-ip=62.13.149.82; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
helo=outmail149082.authsmtp.co.uk;
Received: from outmail149082.authsmtp.co.uk ([62.13.149.82])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1YqlGz-00031B-DH for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 08 May 2015 16:37:15 +0000
Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235])
by punt16.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t48Gb5g8000337;
Fri, 8 May 2015 17:37:05 +0100 (BST)
Received: from savin.petertodd.org (75-119-251-161.dsl.teksavvy.com
[75.119.251.161]) (authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t48Gb1Iv005123
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Fri, 8 May 2015 17:37:04 +0100 (BST)
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 12:37:01 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Message-ID: <20150508163701.GA27417@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <554BE0E1.5030001@bluematt.me>
<CANEZrP3uKLvzKi-wXBJWL=pwqB+eAe3FbPjyESD52y5TGkg+Rg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5mCyUwZo2JvN/JJP"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP3uKLvzKi-wXBJWL=pwqB+eAe3FbPjyESD52y5TGkg+Rg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: 75d8195a-f5a0-11e4-b396-002590a15da7
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aQdMdgoUFVQNAgsB AmMbWlNeU1p7WWc7 bA9PbARUfEhLXhtr
VklWR1pVCwQmRRgJ cUwfK19ydwBHen0+ ZEdjXngVW0EufUd0
Rx9JQ2hXZXphaTUb TRJbfgVJcANIexZF O1F6ACIKLwdSbGoL
NQ4vNDcwO3BTJTpY RgYVKF8UXXNDNDo7 TBNKJjQ9EAUkQS4p
IhU9JxYmEV8MM18/ NFYnRUlw
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 75.119.251.161/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
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 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.0 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
X-Headers-End: 1YqlGz-00031B-DH
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <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: Fri, 08 May 2015 16:37:15 -0000
--5mCyUwZo2JvN/JJP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 12:03:04PM +0200, Mike Hearn wrote:
> >
> > * Though there are many proposals floating around which could
> > significantly decrease block propagation latency, none of them are
> > implemented today.
>=20
>=20
> With a 20mb cap, miners still have the option of the soft limit.
The soft-limit is there miners themselves produce smaller blocks; the
soft-limit does not prevent other miners from producing larger blocks.
As we're talking about ways that other miners can use 20MB blocks to
harm the competition, talking about the soft-limit is irrelevant.
Similarly, as security engineers we must plan for the worst case; as
we've seen before by your campaigns to raise the soft-limit(1) even at a
time when the vast majority of transaction volume was from one user
(SatoshiDice) soft-limits are an extremely weak form of control.
For the proposes of discussing blocksize increase requirements we can
stop talking about the soft-limit.
1) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D149668.0
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000000009344ba165781ee352f93d657c8b098c8e518e6011753e59
--5mCyUwZo2JvN/JJP
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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==
=+WlR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--5mCyUwZo2JvN/JJP--
|
