MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <19956282-19CC-4150-8865-F211774AF70E@novauri.com>
References: <CABsx9T2HegqOBqd1jijk1bZBE6N+NH8x6nfwbaoLBACVf8-WBQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<558A0B4A.7090205@riseup.net> <558A1E8E.30306@novauri.com>
	<CADm_WcZ52_fvNk_rWzu+Nw1CBz2o6t6cMkEfOm3BpdjH7iQKrw@mail.gmail.com>
	<0CAB4453-0C88-4CCB-86C1-DA192D4F77A1@gmail.com>
	<CALqxMTHQCWSg5Px5iLzNisZchuyzWJ2KwtwbWycywDSjF+4GBA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE-z3OXEUE8b_u9Pf8DbPL4jWTqyR7CDJRqKFKoTGpGxnr1QoA@mail.gmail.com>
	<19956282-19CC-4150-8865-F211774AF70E@novauri.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 13:39:58 -0400
Message-ID: <CABsx9T3Rvgbc8WLnnH96nqK_TaAOj9gn-BBmRy_r2Ci0x72mZQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: Will <will.madden@novauri.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3c8429639d905196f3a98
Cc: "bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org"
	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Draft BIP : fixed-schedule block size increase
Precedence: list

--001a11c3c8429639d905196f3a98
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Will <will.madden@novauri.com> wrote:

> Make the lazy miners' default choice grow at the hard cap growth rate and
> you should be ok if you want voting.


I think the default block size is an orthogonal issue to the max block size.

HOWEVER: I think changing the default 'target' block size from the current,
fixed 750K to the average of the size of the last N blocks would have some
nice properties. It is policy-neutral (we should get out of the business of
deciding the right block size and let the miners who care drive block size
up or down) and if there are a significant proportion of lazy miners going
with defaults it gives the system a healthy "fee pressure."

-- 
--
Gavin Andresen

--001a11c3c8429639d905196f3a98
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On F=
ri, Jun 26, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Will <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:=
will.madden@novauri.com" target=3D"_blank">will.madden@novauri.com</a>&gt;<=
/span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8=
ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Make the lazy miners&#39; d=
efault choice grow at the hard cap growth rate and you should be ok if you =
want voting.</blockquote></div><br>I think the default block size is an ort=
hogonal issue to the max block size.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></=
div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">HOWEVER: I think changing the default &#39;t=
arget&#39; block size from the current, fixed 750K to the average of the si=
ze of the last N blocks would have some nice properties. It is policy-neutr=
al (we should get out of the business of deciding the right block size and =
let the miners who care drive block size up or down) and if there are a sig=
nificant proportion of lazy miners going with defaults it gives the system =
a healthy &quot;fee pressure.&quot;</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div><b=
r></div>-- <br><div class=3D"gmail_signature">--<br>Gavin Andresen<br></div=
>
</div></div>

--001a11c3c8429639d905196f3a98--