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
|
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7696A899
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 21 Aug 2015 09:35:22 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail149082.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail149082.authsmtp.co.uk
[62.13.149.82])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D825BAB
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 21 Aug 2015 09:35:21 +0000 (UTC)
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 t7L9ZJAF044121;
Fri, 21 Aug 2015 10:35:19 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [25.160.234.125] ([24.114.37.247]) (authenticated bits=0)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t7L9ZFOh052598
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
Fri, 21 Aug 2015 10:35:17 +0100 (BST)
In-Reply-To: <CADJgMzucVKgQQtzwBNMcU3Vy=ae+2jMQY=am_xYXcKtyforpUg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+1nnrk1EWd7rhwj91p1rqgGVFgOT4UYq=+Nmq41sHJYmy7YYA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgR4bsJtC99-fK1L+FsQT7vOfOpz9FOVqvAnqbpkaRJHLQ@mail.gmail.com>
<BE291934-F40A-4163-834C-6B3FFBD7C4E0@petertodd.org>
<CADJgMzucVKgQQtzwBNMcU3Vy=ae+2jMQY=am_xYXcKtyforpUg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=UTF-8
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 09:35:11 +0000
To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3B2A58B3-6AF6-4F1C-A6FA-7AEC97F48AD0@petertodd.org>
X-Server-Quench: efae7539-47e7-11e5-b398-002590a15da7
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
bgdMdAMUGUATAgsB AmMbWlReU1h7WGs7 aQ5PbARZfElJQQdu
V1dNRFdNFUssBmAI bGhhChl3dQBPcDB3 YENgECUNDRF9cEV0
X0pTQGobZGY1bX1N U0lQagNUcgZDfk5E bwQuUz1vNG8XDSg5
AwQ0PjZ0MThBHWx+ RRsAZX4fX11DTHY3 ThZKDDIyVVYFTj8+
Zw0hN0RUAEYWL0oy LUBpUFgfLgNaAwla V2tsODQRIF9JWyoq
FktFUEQFESFQCXA0
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 24.114.37.247/465
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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: Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
Nicolas Dorier <nicolas.dorier@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Core Devs : can you share your thoughts about all
BIPs on this website ?
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: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 09:35:22 -0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 21 August 2015 02:31:51 GMT-07:00, Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev
><bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> What might be valuable is to ask devs to explain what their threat
>models are, what should be at the root of their thinking about the
>blocksize.
>
>That's exactly what the "Technical Opinion" column is for.
What if could be used for; theres value in being more explicit.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQE9BAEBCgAnIBxQZXRlciBUb2RkIDxwZXRlQHBldGVydG9kZC5vcmc+BQJV1vDG
AAoJEMCF8hzn9Lncz4MIAIMtLLA4q7KJiwrYrpjFWme1ys9iyPZiADJGQWG3qKlH
Q4pEcwWt69jfTUCjLYfegsDW4eEMarejs568iSF70hvGB4OPWrYK3YiM1cWlWtDD
seN3G/4dJjehL7h1Nz+/OTjTlePkguHctRlJTavel8sI7fg356iMJc1Ggm5Q1ZFl
CLrivr/CEO7Qk9Uo5ewhnwConKjLygSyv67SSaMJW7pZB06uTX6M3lk11c/RB/C6
JKPqxkvOmNIX9U8S/G3Y2pYf3/up72IhP0Ugp31iOsz629B2WvEsDYu/0SP61+oZ
za9HrP2g8OsxVq6SUD3MukmbRVKklvcnro4vk5sOlYI=
=Jfl+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
