Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69AD8323 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 20:51:26 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-lb0-f169.google.com (mail-lb0-f169.google.com [209.85.217.169]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9D5E144 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 20:51:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lbbpo10 with SMTP id po10so16752258lbb.3 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 13:51:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=doXis15+8uIlMqz9KLUvDMQq9VvHE1bWH9g/7khqljo=; b=xXQkjr/AdVUzB3HxytbGLw7261AuFu/Kv8G4hB8lgPwSmZ68dbsUQs5WDYtS6hHqZi 9m7zks5Q4QJNg5zHSXkSKrtXS9qH1dpc9TVnB2B2wgw57bbj1kJrX1F/Qij4qtAaL8da x6KUSKkXuN892C5CxrWjNEVTfX1mOJ0IAEWPXZlMyqmJVtOR4f6fi0vgM6Mc14emMcJj j3GnJSC8+27/x2o2YK9zx4NVbecMNd12vgXIKyb8AYeMn+SoJUPRHB/9thNgHuITks9D 5NqSNdWV20CUCAQ8ETEeNndyIK89o6VUPp3f3FDWnwMjQtb/kqbv532hCi1sTOo+Ec8D CJRQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.147.201 with SMTP id tm9mr32088443lbb.40.1435006283849; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 13:51:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.25.90.75 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 13:51:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 16:51:23 -0400 Message-ID: From: Gavin Andresen To: Kalle Rosenbaum Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b34391acca5510519216f41 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,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: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Draft BIP : fixed-schedule block size increase X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 20:51:26 -0000 --047d7b34391acca5510519216f41 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Gavin Andresen wrote: > Excellent point. That could only happen if activation happened on 11 Jan > 2016; instead of complicating the code and spec with another condition, I > think it would be better to specify that the activation date is the later > of the miner supermajority and 11 Jan, with the first big block two weeks > later. > .... I take that back, I'm wrong and Tier is correct: if activation happened right at midnight 11 Jan 2016 and the next block's timestamp was before midnight, that next block would just be limited to 1MB in size. -- -- Gavin Andresen --047d7b34391acca5510519216f41 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On M= on, Jun 22, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.c= om> wrote:
Excellent point. That could only happen if activation happened on 11 Jan = 2016; instead of complicating the code and spec with another condition, I t= hink it would be better to specify that the activation date is the later of= the miner supermajority and 11 Jan, with the first big block two weeks lat= er.

.... I take that back, I'm wrong and Tier is correct: i= f activation happened right at midnight 11 Jan 2016 and the next block'= s timestamp was before midnight, that next block would just be limited to 1= MB in size.

--
--
Gavin= Andresen

--047d7b34391acca5510519216f41--