Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57BFDA49 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2017 13:11:23 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-it0-f42.google.com (mail-it0-f42.google.com [209.85.214.42]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF28817C for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2017 13:11:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f42.google.com with SMTP id v202so38345580itb.0 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2017 06:11:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=44X3Fx2t/IJqYlkvm5wzrh52xXQhSejRWgAeUZiQL1c=; b=NiZpqo7yiFEfBvnZPI3TwzQf4Eo1P+Wo4u8YSIaDLRIUyaSDZKfNx60IoI9Q2+R6N2 x52v5IkA68L4nEOQAEEGGJAn1++dyir4O7WMUfhMSvzgaQsTtLVdpjrQcPoGSdIv2az+ iEbnxHE4fiZHcBdPzVNDFV9vDt+SKRePVcqQdNStzaXpcjZ9pCkSfZ9+JRI2+vMhWknj MMg6WMGOTF0jTh9AEssu4IAtVOTGC/QDBGjKrD4bJm90P7KdpeBspwD8i9P95cRJnziV E0VSQ6VU85ga9SwwpAXPA6rm6pLTsilMIr28WI/F3Wiei6bJFHTkPH3rgNLLhp2xOqhX Gdig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=44X3Fx2t/IJqYlkvm5wzrh52xXQhSejRWgAeUZiQL1c=; b=C6SECTTYo3oxtgVRQXFd2MTrBI+1HfmK4gV2BINIzGUDkyeceMe/HDH2/HgMSd6N4z ZX7l+pq62+PD65HboD0daCNChEzjVXpEOcC0hDZWbS2oUw3L7X6J/92TrmvO/42RqFXU 4pRobdSUhwN+4zU1499pXfIC63YdL1WfnB3nsflpdkOEbGIvP1VhXfvtju4HfVb/G0R9 UJ5f2l4+Otst60o6RDfSyrLT5ptFq7bWkAelVTQldFOkFST6aXEbwjSiELc8XkXQqiew V+e7rtMtZcUEaMiMGEZv5LwUJbw7c/zVqOq98aDN6Wng0f+V9z+rbmOcZDU7+rmyxgOB JgOA== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw111eAtZokzNvhj/JjLRXIYaZNa+03Z3RuROsWNU0jMOxzNhdiQ6S 1c7pNrdW0xuyK+Wwg4QgRMHluxZ6wNEm X-Received: by 10.107.140.5 with SMTP id o5mr3996938iod.11.1499951482195; Thu, 13 Jul 2017 06:11:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.79.10.130 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Jul 2017 06:11:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <0119661e-a11a-6d4b-c9ec-fd510bd4f144@gmail.com> <1c1d06a9-2e9f-5b2d-42b7-d908ada4b09e@gmail.com> <001b20f2-1f33-3484-8ad2-1420ae1a2df5@gmail.com> <03cf3326-ae84-96f9-5eee-158054341eff@osc.co.cr> From: Federico Tenga Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 15:11:21 +0200 Message-ID: To: Gregory Maxwell , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c060fd846d691055432abe3" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 13:21:37 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] how to disable segwit in my build? X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 13:11:23 -0000 --94eb2c060fd846d691055432abe3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On 13 July 2017 at 03:04, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > Can you explain why you wish to do this? It should have absolutely no > adverse impact on you-- if you don't use segwit, you don't use it-- it > may be the case that there is some confusion about the implications > that I could clear up for you... or suggest alternatives that might > achieve your goals. > I believe that a good reason not to wish your node to be segwit compliant is to avoid having to deal with the extra bandwidth that segwit could require. Running a 0.14.2 node means being ok with >1MB blocks, in case segwit is activated and widely used. Users not interested in segwit transactions may prefer to keep the cost of their node lower. --94eb2c060fd846d691055432abe3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 1= 3 July 2017 at 03:04, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <= ;bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

Can you explain why you wish to do this?=C2=A0 It should have absolutely no=
adverse impact on you-- if you don't use segwit, you don't use it--= it
may be the case that there is some confusion about the implications
that I could clear up for you... or suggest alternatives that might
achieve your goals.

I believe that a good reason n= ot to wish your node to be segwit=20 compliant is to avoid having to deal with the extra bandwidth that=20 segwit could require. =C2=A0 Running a 0.14.2 node means being ok with=20 >1MB blocks, in case segwit is activated and widely used. Users not=20 interested in segwit transactions may prefer to keep the cost of their=20 node lower.
--94eb2c060fd846d691055432abe3--