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
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
|
Return-Path: <tier.nolan@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4431F17
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 24 Jan 2018 15:03:19 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ot0-f174.google.com (mail-ot0-f174.google.com
[74.125.82.174])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45D70413
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 24 Jan 2018 15:03:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ot0-f174.google.com with SMTP id a24so3813647otd.4
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 24 Jan 2018 07:03:19 -0800 (PST)
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=3DeRZZtKrFqogEC40BNntK/Wfo865HlXHiW5o4UlIzE=;
b=jX7RgL592xGsj9pD5xG+8Led/IEicLfsWNJxNrFO+/yyq1wQgEmnCcyUHm833UfKFK
Bhhmy6W65IQOb8jiUbzd6P421aYmkdo74V6961yaAz0D4fSMn89kWVYW504Lsekh6Nwr
DqoDkwcTM2gJbrBGLqfDCGEdGSeYF/gJsQ83uKvp1anG19FclSOQT/jG6gxAURaNiN1F
RyOqDdLATge7P8CurMYpKnM5v0R4ytwDkytUu6Tv6Y7vCcNBjnuTnOenXClLxDnPQkhJ
3D5PQo30fxJyvIq+7uAvqDegNV62HOOeYBdDJC6fc8aden/7zS4izRJjMbEmDyHeVJAQ
SwhA==
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=3DeRZZtKrFqogEC40BNntK/Wfo865HlXHiW5o4UlIzE=;
b=DVR1erS+fbuAjgeUSfh61C4UgWWZOu/w5D31tV2u6gpKgzE8Ewz0R5ByUvIlcCsSH5
OKe1nPW5ipQ80ORbzWHVQ7GOo7e452cA46bUdK4YguYENn0yxp4ZHkyyY8fo8oeeo1fv
6h0usWp6p3VwwMCRoe8fKlFrhYy3pOEpueX/YOyUMo/gvoq8KmuX0wm6kv/jgp8BvNiD
ZGMju02u2VzTQ2rUgYeXkqQJK3U37IPMebopB4pft/enwxvDIYHNYrDpN94nxlZ5/FqS
yrC/YiM+ZQzKjlQu4F+nq6I+UMkiO9pdFmOftAbmi3ukBSQf4DXPlvgJlYOLGF20QFKM
5HJQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytekvMSSxo7gN7mRFWckFvH1sfFxUHtyq/g5zVczeHbbmQA9/0j/
DCs0xEbuN+cmbf03UXoXwPl0kjoOY67zgeCZaOY=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x227ufmsUc15EBvZpiT+m8tEDdL4vfroX29DQ/7T8XS3j3N/lcDIDsNsHKfgdWFKGk0POb+idUHhqXZF7c7hvriQ=
X-Received: by 10.157.80.9 with SMTP id a9mr8981250oth.147.1516806198333; Wed,
24 Jan 2018 07:03:18 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.74.38.136 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 07:02:38 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CALTsm7jeqQUhL+REvzBQNUtSMd9i9oVeXEkdCuUuGOpz_V=b8Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALTsm7gG6bWJd=HQ5XJTYxWbxNPwZDC6Xefsh_zSAQhk89A4VQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CALTsm7ir61RCfGSf8r71+soDJH+W9n_dPORS+2+ARKEzhpnXWw@mail.gmail.com>
<CALTsm7ii4PZ_of=YPpB2x_nMGGTFrDW8OGOx6LehfyQD22JMYw@mail.gmail.com>
<CALTsm7jOPr17d1syFZ9wsYAntcUss+tcrHU_vQKC2TEZ1ong9g@mail.gmail.com>
<CALTsm7i=ThDfv2uquHAxvLgQ497oVkYhYF5gNFcv3RxEkDVr5A@mail.gmail.com>
<CALTsm7ijaK+fWk9jKUMD0MGqwAeSYwc3XOyGOs8AYZ9AYL_uGA@mail.gmail.com>
<CALTsm7jeqQUhL+REvzBQNUtSMd9i9oVeXEkdCuUuGOpz_V=b8Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tier Nolan <tier.nolan@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 15:02:38 +0000
Message-ID: <CAE-z3OXJJ=BQhYmjLyq2x8xSwAi5j0cBOvqe3um8_QjV9fSLDA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f4030435abe8a51651056386f68f"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE 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] Merge of protocol
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: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 15:03:19 -0000
--f4030435abe8a51651056386f68f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
If the communities behind two coins wanted to merge, it would be possible,
but difficulty and risky.
It represents a hard fork on both chains. Not only does each coin's
community need to agree, the two communities need to agree with each other.
They would both have to agree the join point. The merge block would have 2
parents.
A <- B <- C <- D
\
J1 <- J2 <- J3 <- J4
/
w <- x <- y <- z
In the above example, A, B, C, D is one chain and w, x, y, z is the other.
They combine and then J1, J2, J3, J4 is the combined chain.
Since block "J1" has 2 parents, it commits to the state of the 2 legacy
chains. If you have coins in each chain at D or z, then you get coins in
the joint chain.
They would both need to agree on what the rules are for their new chain.
Since it is a (double) hard fork, they can do pretty much anything they
want.
The combined chain could continue as before. It would be a combined chain
and each user's coin total would be unaffected. The advantage of doing
that is that it causes minimum economic disruption to users. The mining
power for both chains would be applied to the joint chain, so they combine
their security.
Alternatively, they could agree on an exchange rate. Users would be given
joint-coins in exchange for their coins on the 2 legacy chains.
For something like Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin, they could have a
re-combination rule. 1 Bitcoin-Recombined = 1 BTC + 1 BCH. That doesn't
seem very likely though and also there are more BCH coins than BTC coins.
It might be worth moving this to bitcoin-discuss, since it isn't really
Bitcoin protocol discussion.
Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Ilan Oh via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.
linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 2017 was fork year,
>
> Is it technically possible to merge two protocoles ? And thus bringing the
> strength of both into one resulting coin.
>
> I would not be surprized to see a lot of altcoin wanting to merge with
> bitcoin or between them, especially with LN current development, if it is
> possible,
>
> If anyone has ideas or ressources on this,
>
> Thanks
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
--f4030435abe8a51651056386f68f
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div>If the communities behind two coins wa=
nted to merge, it would be possible, but difficulty and risky.<br><br></div=
>It represents a hard fork on both chains.=C2=A0 Not only does each coin&#=
39;s community need to agree, the two communities need to agree with each o=
ther.<br><br></div>They would both have to agree the join point.=C2=A0 The=
merge block would have 2 parents.<br><br><br></div><span style=3D"font-fam=
ily:monospace,monospace">A <- B <- C <- D <br>=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=
=A0 \<br></span></div><div><span style=3D"font-family:monospace,monospace">=
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=
=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 J1 <- J2 <- J3 <- J4<br></=
span></div><div><span style=3D"font-family:monospace,monospace">=C2=A0=C2=
=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
=C2=A0=C2=A0 /<br></span></div><span style=3D"font-family:monospace,monospa=
ce">w <- x <- y <- z<br></span><div><div><div><span style=3D"font-=
family:monospace,monospace"><br></span><br></div><div>In the above example,=
A, B, C, D is one chain and w, x, y, z is the other.=C2=A0 They combine an=
d then J1, J2, J3, J4 is the combined chain.<br><br></div><div>Since block =
"J1" has 2 parents, it commits to the state of the 2 legacy chain=
s.=C2=A0 If you have coins in each chain at D or z, then you get coins in t=
he joint chain.<br></div><div><br></div><div>They would both need to agree =
on what the rules are for their new chain.=C2=A0 Since it is a (double) har=
d fork, they can do pretty much anything they want.<br></div><div><br></div=
><div>The combined chain could continue as before.=C2=A0 It would be a comb=
ined chain and each user's coin total would be unaffected.=C2=A0 The ad=
vantage of doing that is that it causes minimum economic disruption to user=
s.=C2=A0 The mining power for both chains would be applied to the joint cha=
in, so they combine their security.=C2=A0 <br><br></div><div class=3D"gmail=
_quote">Alternatively, they could agree on an exchange rate.=C2=A0 Users wo=
uld be given joint-coins in exchange for their coins on the 2 legacy chains=
.<br><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote">For something like Bitcoin Cash a=
nd Bitcoin, they could have a re-combination rule.=C2=A0 1 Bitcoin-Recombin=
ed =3D 1 BTC + 1 BCH.=C2=A0 That doesn't seem very likely though and al=
so there are more BCH coins than BTC coins. <br></div><div class=3D"gmail_q=
uote"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote">It might be worth moving this to=
bitcoin-discuss, since it isn't really Bitcoin protocol discussion.<br=
></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><br><br>Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Il=
an Oh via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@l=
ists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.<wbr>linuxfou=
ndation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" styl=
e=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div di=
r=3D"auto">2017 was fork year,<div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto"=
>Is it technically possible to merge two protocoles ? And thus bringing the=
strength of both into one resulting coin.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div=
><div dir=3D"auto">I would not be surprized to see a lot of altcoin wanting=
to merge with bitcoin or between them, especially with LN current developm=
ent, if it is possible,</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">=
If anyone has ideas or ressources on this,=C2=A0</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br=
></div><div dir=3D"auto">Thanks</div></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundat<wbr>ion.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-d<wbr>ev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div></div></di=
v></div></div>
--f4030435abe8a51651056386f68f--
|
