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
127
128
|
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 <stephencalebmorse@gmail.com>) id 1Z3zLw-0002F6-RI
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 14 Jun 2015 04:17:00 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.220.171 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.220.171;
envelope-from=stephencalebmorse@gmail.com;
helo=mail-qk0-f171.google.com;
Received: from mail-qk0-f171.google.com ([209.85.220.171])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Z3zLv-000712-S4
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 14 Jun 2015 04:17:00 +0000
Received: by qkdm188 with SMTP id m188so15878402qkd.1
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sat, 13 Jun 2015 21:16:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.140.130.5 with SMTP id 5mr515680qhc.12.1434255414445;
Sat, 13 Jun 2015 21:16:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.7] (c-24-218-184-40.hsd1.nh.comcast.net.
[24.218.184.40])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id i91sm4242139qgd.46.2015.06.13.21.16.53
(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Sat, 13 Jun 2015 21:16:53 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Stephen <stephencalebmorse@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (12F70)
In-Reply-To: <20150612181153.GB19199@muck>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2015 00:16:53 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2B60EFC7-60C9-470A-9022-F6FA5566CF11@gmail.com>
References: <20150612181153.GB19199@muck>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
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
(stephencalebmorse[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
X-Headers-End: 1Z3zLv-000712-S4
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] User vote in blocksize through fees
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, 14 Jun 2015 04:17:00 -0000
While this idea is theoretically interesting because it involves many stakeh=
olders, rather than just miners, I think in practice this would not work ver=
y well. Users don't want to worry about this kind of technicality, they just=
want to be able to make a transaction and have it be processed.=20
In addition, while this gives stakeholders some weight with the fees they su=
pply, these fees are marginal compared to the block size subsidy. If this pr=
oposal were actually implemented, I think miners would vote for whatever the=
y think is best, and users would not contradict them with their votes to ens=
ure a fast confirmation time. Users are incentivized to be in agreement with=
miners because the miners provide them with the confirmations they need, bu=
t fees do not provide a great incentive for miners to be in agreement with u=
sers, and likely won't for some time.=20
Best,=20
Stephen=20
> On Jun 12, 2015, at 2:11 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
>=20
> Jeff Garzik recently proposed that the upper blocksize limit be removed
> entirely, with a "soft" limit being enforced via miner vote, recorded by
> hashing power.
>=20
> This mechanism within the protocol for users to have any influence over
> the miner vote. We can add that back by providing a way for transactions
> themselves to set a flag determining whether or not they can be included
> in a block casting a specific vote.
>=20
> We can simplify Garzik's vote to say that one of the nVersion bits
> either votes for the blocksize to be increased, or decreased, by some
> fixed ratio (e.g 2x or 1/2x) the next interval. Then we can use a
> nVersion bit in transactions themselves, also voting for an increase or
> decrease. Transactions may only be included in blocks with an
> indentical vote, thus providing miners with a monetary incentive via
> fees to vote according to user wishes.
>=20
> Of course, to cast a "don't care" vote we can either define an
> additional bit, or sign the transaction with both versions. Equally we
> can even have different versions with different fees, broadcast via a
> mechanism such as replace-by-fee.
>=20
>=20
> See also John Dillon's proposal for proof-of-stake blocksize voting:
>=20
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg=
02323.html
>=20
> --=20
> 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
> 0000000000000000127ab1d576dc851f374424f1269c4700ccaba2c42d97e778
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------=
----
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
|
