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
|
Return-Path: <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com>
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2878C000D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 15 Sep 2021 15:24:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94D5881A3B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 15 Sep 2021 15:24:50 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3,
SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mattcorallo.com
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id y8i650zoZEss
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 15 Sep 2021 15:24:49 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail.as397444.net (mail.as397444.net [IPv6:2620:6e:a000:1::99])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CE8C819CC
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 15 Sep 2021 15:24:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail.as397444.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4H8kXt2p0gz12LlV;
Wed, 15 Sep 2021 15:24:46 +0000 (UTC)
X-DKIM-Note: Keys used to sign are likely public at https://as397444.net/dkim/
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mattcorallo.com;
s=1631718065; t=1631719486;
bh=gNizbQt8kANTxcLGOI4BpKDVr966Cz5EqEkJstO4Xm0=;
h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Cc:References:To:From;
b=p58rS/gIjXYgLP2WyG3f2WJH+8hT67Bmlj16ypB2fbwsNN6kHcyRMZVGMg0aocPqy
z7P8jYxbevGBAL0Gnp+TPwe0aRDlKMAqlUzWjaFe1EKxZ7e8ZRRyeMyHPtn6fVeU2q
5Glz3Yu7uhg0XdRSXGcm6zffovJSzXrxcn60lI3Gg9ETccNU+xyljNIPnJXWo5PKg6
gXUGntcqX1d3+jCQJwKDGLqb0EpMbd966BHBDGVUXbs8N60PfKdSvLfw1UyMvWmNdh
A3QJO9cz3gNBniDucsT3KDClcCOdZIbrWbpB/q8hZ9+F9vtMwYriKkIVfxI0D3Y0uP
+3maR6jgWmsdg==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Matt Corallo <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210914045610.GA25475@erisian.com.au>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 08:24:43 -0700
Message-Id: <90AD5816-4B44-4BBB-A2FC-39CD381D6395@mattcorallo.com>
References: <20210914045610.GA25475@erisian.com.au>
To: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Reorgs on SigNet - Looking for feedback on
approach and parameters
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: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 15:24:50 -0000
> On Sep 13, 2021, at 21:56, Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> wrote:
> I'm not sure that's really the question you want answered?
Of course it is? I=E2=80=99d like to understand the initial thinking and des=
ign analysis that went into this decision. That seems like an important ques=
tion to ask when seeking changes in an existing system :).
> Mostly
> it's just "this is how mainnet works" plus "these are the smallest
> changes to have blocks be chosen by a signature, rather than entirely
> by PoW competition".
>=20
> For integration testing across many services, I think a ten-minute-average=
> between blocks still makes sense -- protocols relying on CSV/CLTV to
> ensure there's a delay they can use to recover funds, if they specify
> that in blocks (as lightning's to_self_delay does), then significant
> surges of blocks will cause uninteresting bugs.=20
Hmm, why would blocks coming quicker lead to a bug? I certainly hope no one h=
as a bug if their block time is faster than per ten minutes. I presume here,=
you mean something like =E2=80=9Cif the node can=E2=80=99t keep up with the=
block rate=E2=80=9D, but I certainly hope the benchmark for may isn=E2=80=99=
t 10 minutes, or really even one.
> It would be easy enough to change things to target an average of 2 or
> 5 minutes, I suppose, but then you'd probably need to propogate that
> logic back into your apps that would otherwise think 144 blocks is around
> about a day.
Why? One useful thing for testing is compressing real time. More broadly, th=
e only issues that I=E2=80=99ve heard around block times in testnet3 are the=
inconsistency and, rarely software failing to keep up at all.
> We could switch back to doing blocks exactly every 10 minutes, rather
> than a poisson-ish distribution in the range of 1min to 60min, but that
> doesn't seem like that huge a win, and makes it hard to test that things
> behave properly when blocks arrive in bursts.
Hmm, I suppose? If you want to test that the upper bound doesn=E2=80=99t nee=
d to be 100 minutes, though, it could be 10.
> Best of luck to you then? Nobody's trying to sell you on a subscription
> plan to using signet.
lol, yes, I=E2=80=99m aware of that, nor did I mean to imply that anything h=
as to be targeted at a specific person=E2=80=99s requirements. Rather, my po=
int here is that I=E2=80=99m really confused as to who the target user *is*=
, because we should be building products with target users in mind, even if t=
hose targets are often =E2=80=9Cme=E2=80=9D for open source projects.=
|
