Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDE3B7A8 for ; Sat, 1 Apr 2017 14:07:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-vk0-f48.google.com (mail-vk0-f48.google.com [209.85.213.48]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81576E3 for ; Sat, 1 Apr 2017 14:07:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vk0-f48.google.com with SMTP id r69so109191081vke.2 for ; Sat, 01 Apr 2017 07:07:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jtimon-cc.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8F5jUTphNuBCNzwbonG496xTN+U7ucT/xM8DEYT4Ulc=; b=bJo468ZxZQiJXGJXG+BPGa9QJLqSqX57jndj01o/Zy2+UddrkO+Cb8Wf9hNM1hkbca vIXnv15zAZlEMFtHNHUX7XTQEk/sFOC7KL32bwQBud6hOIZFmG+/GGeV4qxp1y+krE+/ q1wII3np14j3oUobWUsGT6Y7NkBmXvBEUZ2KHrlpSQzI5Tpg8A+mP6nQBZfHDGy7v8MK rUYPrvxxW0JmmOc/dmSnQaecbQjI6S+qXoG3vLRyS/acaOwifCh2GfyI0M0CT/8qOdlp lQr9bwzjKgAwFequfoZpXCb9iYc73vigSLAh00vKdxrIGma7wSfjqGZk7/EZGCEkg3Km 8xig== 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:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8F5jUTphNuBCNzwbonG496xTN+U7ucT/xM8DEYT4Ulc=; b=L8moUlSW6CINynTQWto0AyQ9PfPJeX8Y0YezeaHixw8x6yedGwq63uWxVS5SRjO0VZ 5rbASpWwPnSMm40sN/U6oOyyKZQZhI+10DtqQa6p1mvYlZlrtgFcyjwZyAvk8P0/ob1g kempVTJlaRWPmOFBxKl5smlCUDl3a+8Hagr1fUNhWGi7/W2gXJ1E3vF2JAq1+LCWRKS8 tnJ6qS/Q4KBpsn21zdfAojSHAaO+qg5Bdu0TYHd5T5RhhaRu6Z0KGxu9LQbWX27VmPnI jNeDQvpyEWq7+jnoBDBCIaql4SAntVgh/1+ylFzKlWxBnzRp0N9GpPlxbP5EKnrHPqf7 Yecw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0h4LTu5uxAJtMsoN06zT22scBQYoiNlWHBxzpuzYAm4lm9H0O1ObQct1whDhZzPTNQ8fWbooZTxgL47Q== X-Received: by 10.31.234.3 with SMTP id i3mr3928583vkh.36.1491055653480; Sat, 01 Apr 2017 07:07:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.31.151.136 with HTTP; Sat, 1 Apr 2017 07:07:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1CF1FD5D-8D29-4783-823F-B3F588D5C5CE@mattcorallo.com> From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2017 16:07:32 +0200 Message-ID: To: Natanael Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, 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 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Segwit2Mb - combined soft/hard fork - Request For Comments 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: Sat, 01 Apr 2017 14:07:35 -0000 On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Natanael wrote: > > > Den 1 apr. 2017 14:33 skrev "Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin-dev" > : > > Segwit replaces the 1 mb size limit with a weight limit of 4 mb. > > > That would make it a hardfork, not a softfork, if done exactly as you say= . > > Segwit only separates out signature data. The 1 MB limit remains, but wou= ld > now only cover the contents of the transaction scripts. With segwit that > means we have two (2) size limits, not one. This is important to remember= . > Even with segwit + MAST for large complex scripts, there's still going to= be > a very low limit to the total number of possible transactions per block. = And > not all transactions will get the same space savings. No, because of the way the weight is calculated, it is impossible to create a block that old nodes would perceive as bigger than 1 mb without also violating the weight limit. After segwit activation, nodes supporting segwit don't need to validate the 1 mb size limit anymore as long as they validate the weight limit. The weight is also the only notion of cost miners need to consider when comparing txs by feerate (fee per cost, before segwit tx_fee/tx_size, post-segwit tx_fee/tx_weight). This is important to remember, because having 2 separated limits or costs would make block creation and relay policies much harder to implement. Therefore a hardfork after segwit can just increase the weight limit and completely forget about the pre-segwit 1 mb size limit.