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
|
Return-Path: <vjudeu@gazeta.pl>
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::136])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B51B2C000D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 17 Oct 2021 07:24:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96D9760671
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 17 Oct 2021 07:24:54 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gazeta.pl
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id MsKcuxn2-ZZL
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 17 Oct 2021 07:24:53 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from smtpo79.poczta.onet.pl (smtpo79.poczta.onet.pl [141.105.16.29])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25D1C605F4
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 17 Oct 2021 07:24:52 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pmq8v.m5r2.onet (pmq8v.m5r2.onet [10.174.35.145])
by smtp.poczta.onet.pl (Onet) with ESMTP id 4HXBNF0W38zlgMTm;
Sun, 17 Oct 2021 09:24:45 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gazeta.pl; s=2013;
t=1634455485; bh=owKpP6pv8MkVpP8INRcCizdzTH2GcTbOsxYtghXet1k=;
h=From:Cc:To:Date:Subject:From;
b=r/Vciff/ONNvOPwVjrABubRMPIL5Cvq1yxBkA/NweGSg6NjTzTTxlbPRsT20azsBJ
HL3cXAC6069R14jlc5T1/Ikq3A7wxEULUHIAz9rpz9/ajnbYvZ5EYEOo6F4A/pm6b9
z3Dy7Ajpret+lUfVTnlLijMJHCR601rQ7xtjAJeA=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Received: from [5.173.13.16] by pmq8v.m5r2.onet via HTTP id ;
Sun, 17 Oct 2021 09:24:45 +0200
From: vjudeu@gazeta.pl
X-Priority: 3
To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2021 09:24:43 +0200
Message-Id: <118811322-c002f9f41f003a55807feca44f9160a2@pmq8v.m5r2.onet>
X-Mailer: onet.poczta
X-Onet-PMQ: <vjudeu@gazeta.pl>;5.173.13.16;PL;3
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 17 Oct 2021 07:27:42 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Year 2038 problem and year 2106 chain halting
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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: Sun, 17 Oct 2021 07:24:54 -0000
> Then starting at Unix Epoch 0x80000000, post-softfork nodes just incremen=
t the timestamp by 1 on each new block.
It is possible to go even faster. The fastest rate is something like that, =
if you assume the time in the Genesis Block is zero:
0 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 ...
Then you can increment timestamps once per 6 blocks, that means x3600 incre=
ase, but then the difficulty is always multiplied by four, so you have to i=
ncrease time once per difficulty change to keep it on real level, then it w=
ill wave between being multiplied by 4 and by 0.25.
On 2021-10-17 01:23:24 user ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> wrote:
> Good morning vjudeu,
> > What happens if a series of blocks has a timestamp of 0xFFFFFFFF at the=
appropriate time?
>
> The chain will halt for all old clients, because there is no 32-bit value=
greater than 0xffffffff.
>
> > 1. Is not violated, since "not lower than" means "greater than or equa=
l to"
>
> No, because it has to be strictly "greater than" in the Bitcoin Core sour=
ce code, it is rejected when it is "lower or equal to", see:https://github.=
com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/6f0cbc75be7644c276650fd98bfdb6358b827399/src/valid=
ation.cpp#L3089-L3094
Then starting at Unix Epoch 0x80000000, post-softfork nodes just increment =
the timestamp by 1 on each new block.
This just kicks the can since that then imposes a limit on the maximum numb=
er of blocks, but at least the unit is now ~10 minutes instead of 1 second,=
a massive x600 increase in the amount of time we are forced to hardfork.
On the other hand, this does imply that the difficulty calculation will bec=
ome astronomically and ludicrously high, since pre-softfork nodes will thin=
k that blocks are arriving at the rate of 1 per second, so ...
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
