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
|
Return-Path: <dave@dtrt.org>
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC6C1C000D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 10 Sep 2021 20:01:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC24361B99
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 10 Sep 2021 20:01:34 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.61
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.61 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, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335,
RCVD_IN_XBL=0.375, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dtrt.org
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 H-bgfeNNLZjp
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 10 Sep 2021 20:01:33 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from newmail.dtrt.org (newmail.dtrt.org
[IPv6:2600:3c03::f03c:91ff:fe7b:78d1])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE9C261B92
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 10 Sep 2021 20:01:33 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dtrt.org;
s=20201208; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:
Subject:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:
Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc
:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:
List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;
bh=uC2g5nxDA84h1bS6uX4xRoxMRiDu4RMx/wLWnh9Xxc8=; b=0yMOK1oQSi6Y7l93xeIGqO5lJC
RNzMRMfYOFUEp3jruHVYNftMLfYe1dZJfiuCLaYwgfkv/yD0WI/B9oCmM7yQzHTVM7ooxuTBeszjt
1kc7PelFFPWTB/WDsnGA08lzRPgAvzPN1GJUdCLx4h31QBrgNcdz1khuJznTt7+egPT4=;
Received: from harding by newmail.dtrt.org with local (Exim 4.92)
(envelope-from <dave@dtrt.org>)
id 1mOmiJ-0000UI-Cj; Fri, 10 Sep 2021 10:01:31 -1000
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 10:00:05 -1000
From: "David A. Harding" <dave@dtrt.org>
To: Matt Corallo <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <20210910200005.misxood4z7qzqxdl@ganymede>
References: <CAFvNmHR+SkAcd_Pr50bMhpWQwCULEo3rC1cwDSRAnu6kmGYAiQ@mail.gmail.com>
<50970c07-b447-0b49-3f2b-b8a4961761f1@mattcorallo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="hlqwu4mybssxthze"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <50970c07-b447-0b49-3f2b-b8a4961761f1@mattcorallo.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
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: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 20:01:34 -0000
--hlqwu4mybssxthze
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 11:24:15AM -0700, Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I'm [...] suggesting [...] that the existing block producers each
> generate a new key, and we then only sign reorgs with *those* keys.
> Users will be able to set a flag to indicate "I want to accept sigs
> from either sets of keys, and see reorgs" or "I only want sigs from
> the non-reorg keys, and will consider the reorg keys-signed blocks
> invalid"
This seems pretty useful to me. I think we might want multiple sets of
keys:
0. No reorgs
1. Periodic reorgs of small to moderate depth for ongoing testing
without excessive disruption (e.g. the every 8 hours proposal). I think
this probably ought to be the default-default `-signet` in Bitcoin Core
and other nodes.
2. Either frequent reorgs (e.g. every block) or a webapp that generates
reorgs on demand to further reduce testing delays.
If we can only have two, I'd suggest dropping 0. I think it's already
the case that too few people test their software with reorgs.
-Dave
--hlqwu4mybssxthze
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=0XVj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--hlqwu4mybssxthze--
|
