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
|
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 B90178A1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 9 Aug 2016 02:21:35 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail148161.authsmtp.com (outmail148161.authsmtp.com
[62.13.148.161])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E372420C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 9 Aug 2016 02:21:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c247.authsmtp.com (mail-c247.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.247])
by punt24.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u792LXbR082194;
Tue, 9 Aug 2016 03:21:33 +0100 (BST)
Received: from petertodd.org (ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com
[52.5.185.120]) (authenticated bits=0)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u792LWpi023125
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
Tue, 9 Aug 2016 03:21:32 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7AC0440104;
Tue, 9 Aug 2016 02:18:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 844732054D; Mon, 8 Aug 2016 19:21:29 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 19:21:29 -0700
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Chris Priest <cp368202@ohiou.edu>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <20160809022129.GB1858@fedora-21-dvm>
References: <CAAcC9ysZdnzb9HwN_pUcdws8Dvtd5xpzoPbyHP1nNew=LeTDHg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="/WwmFnJnmDyWGHa4"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAAcC9ysZdnzb9HwN_pUcdws8Dvtd5xpzoPbyHP1nNew=LeTDHg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-Server-Quench: fd5dfd4e-5dd7-11e6-bcde-0015176ca198
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aAdMdgsUGUATAgsB AmAbW1deUlx7WmA7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq
T0pMXVMcUQJhA2Bm RkceUBpzdQAIfXty ZQg0CnUPChB+IFt4
FhpTCGwHMGF9OjNL BV1YdwJRcQRMLU5E Y1gxNiYHcQ5VPz4z
GA41ejw8IwAXag9V SwcCLFQdAw4XHjN0 TRQFFjY0HF8IDyEy Kh06Ql4B
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1038:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 52.5.185.120/25
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
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] *Changing* the blocksize limit
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 09 Aug 2016 02:21:35 -0000
--/WwmFnJnmDyWGHa4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, Aug 06, 2016 at 07:15:22AM -0700, Chris Priest via bitcoin-dev wrot=
e:
> If the blocksize limit is to be changed to a block output limit, the
> number the limit is set to should be roughly the amount of outputs
> that are found in 1MB blocks today. This way, the change should be
The largest output on testnet is a bit under 1MB, and encodes a certain
well-known love song...
In many circumstances(1) miners have an incentive to create larger blocks t=
hat
take their competitors longer to receive and validate, so protocol-level bl=
ock
limits need to take all these potential DoS vectors into account; serialized
size is one of the most fundemental things that needs to be limited.
> considered non-controversial. I think its silly that some people think
> its a good thing to keep usage restricted, but again, it is what it
> is.
As mentioned above, and explained in detail in my recent blog post(1),
restrictions are needed to keep a level playing field between all miners.
1) https://petertodd.org/2016/block-publication-incentives-for-miners
--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
--/WwmFnJnmDyWGHa4
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXqT4mAAoJEGOZARBE6K+yG+EH/1JLQK39wkwg68/UVji/LkAK
lmaF9nGkpgEXHBpQNx0pFYMSWCZu380bmBCm/UmOoGOqXjpPszfzfhN+UypUPiAH
tbVY8q4jQqtMO2jZMC30AVRdwsp9HjByxATk1sXgYbiCNCrfOQdSwtZaUxb4WP3+
hqte/ZY0cemgC1lgZCbFbnnwKVlizULpDNNsfBubtBlxQ0zsWpf00DDeo0x3L+NY
sS2uVeIhNVV9oADy9d1HZeSi1xGbB4G2QuqIbEA3Kms5MVdtSOgOjHpK86NkAt9L
WKupIIRw+RnyIhqWMbTAwOBQqQo6u4d1M+bYFsr/0Y24Br6/tT9k7ZgZYbqEbTI=
=KweW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--/WwmFnJnmDyWGHa4--
|
