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
|
Return-Path: <hearn@vinumeris.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B47BAC3D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 28 Sep 2015 14:33:24 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ig0-f173.google.com (mail-ig0-f173.google.com
[209.85.213.173])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41801CC
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 28 Sep 2015 14:33:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by igbkq10 with SMTP id kq10so54231123igb.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:33:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=vinumeris.com; s=google;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=8chcO65mrT82dn6mXLztlaxUzoKZ3J77WawM2g5JmyY=;
b=pEOMCpWWWa9hmIPlDWLznLa57+cKXyKi7azFiQT8LNTroXtwSms5SBxAFMfi4jzjI7
Ca5P2A20hVFjHdWnf+G6lbpR5mq6ajT2Ii3iMue4UA8eZH78TgV4Oqen9oUwq5qKvvIi
0f6Itzxxf0iSNaYlzqRs126stKIReOpZdz6Lk=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=8chcO65mrT82dn6mXLztlaxUzoKZ3J77WawM2g5JmyY=;
b=fdany7I2IQOZI8cerdKncidPy9ucPWQRxXAXkKIZicFic5xknKJaUG3+NUsPMUCv1w
axL4vJYXa/D+6CVteUIYWM130T0OvKJmfeZjHBItkyvZJmwAN2pYBPZL2rW/qGR0tMhn
8dMCkEkYXqlhLZTLQUuYW+hrtJIzIFv0WHrQsLq76OWdGbUQ23v4GzuXt6B/YUNoF48A
nz1p38cr/k+QK3sCkYVbvob2upqE8LiwEDH3E1OQqpynHR8U+r+a8eoT893XhKTF28Uk
zRaSpGPtkDx/M6xXSCsB2KLCV66aHdRTOCOspL76hDC+xvmXKJCHva5MqBjkAp7YlXaN
MRZg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl3/Ev7AnNUFqirXmum1WRhjuq1iEj380TMUpHfSEi71LWd/QZCb5quFgI+aQKsf1F76H+e
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.3.3 with SMTP id 3mr16853370igy.34.1443450803686; Mon, 28
Sep 2015 07:33:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.50.226.144 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:33:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20150928142953.GC21815@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <20150927185031.GA20599@savin.petertodd.org>
<CA+w+GKRCVr-9TVk66utp7xLRgTxNpxYoj3XQE-6y_N8JS6eO6Q@mail.gmail.com>
<20150928132127.GA4829@savin.petertodd.org>
<CA+w+GKTCZDNVJ-XEmsCAWGXUV3xOzVYmqMQYm0x+ihyYWQN0Gg@mail.gmail.com>
<20150928142953.GC21815@savin.petertodd.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 16:33:23 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+w+GKTUz2eVJOpixSebWiQ59ovoELNhsZWSsbLHXWqk2eCn0A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <hearn@vinumeris.com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013cbd3268444e0520cf9483
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HTML_MESSAGE,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] Let's deploy BIP65 CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY!
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: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 14:33:24 -0000
--089e013cbd3268444e0520cf9483
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> SPV wallets can't detect hard-forks
They don't have to - they pick the highest work chain. Any miner who hasn't
upgraded makes blocks on the shorter chain that are then ignored (or
rather, stored for future reorgs). After the fork point, there won't be any
blocks in the main chain that violate the rules and end up being doomed to
being orphaned, which is the underlying problem.
And I think you know this already. There is no "flaw" in bitcoinj in this
respect. It works exactly as it was designed to work.
--089e013cbd3268444e0520cf9483
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"><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left:1ex">SPV wallets can't detect hard-forks</blockqu=
ote><div><br></div><div>They don't have to - they pick the highest work=
chain. Any miner who hasn't upgraded makes blocks on the shorter chain=
that are then ignored (or rather, stored for future reorgs). After the for=
k point, there won't be any blocks in the main chain that violate the r=
ules and end up being doomed to being orphaned, which is the underlying pro=
blem.</div><div><br></div><div>And I think you know this already. There is =
no "flaw" in bitcoinj in this respect. It works exactly as it was=
designed to work.</div></div></div></div>
--089e013cbd3268444e0520cf9483--
|
