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
|
Return-Path: <jeremie.dl@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59EDFD3A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 2 Mar 2016 15:24:33 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-oi0-f45.google.com (mail-oi0-f45.google.com
[209.85.218.45])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34C50A8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 2 Mar 2016 15:24:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-oi0-f45.google.com with SMTP id d205so72568201oia.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 02 Mar 2016 07:24:32 -0800 (PST)
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-transfer-encoding;
bh=q78vzW4HOgmUP0xdLSbAAMsnV5a8dczRTsQXuxEIQhQ=;
b=KtP0C6mUMbmjonVT5PoH5FFZWMBY5zc3KLJrQH8d42hyHa+eDdsQ2TpzUoLzSue2Je
hm5oPNsVqCFJ/PLVGJg3Tnvyv+GLUHD5usURSM1LzPNrpkdD8UYoHjRETzJEhLUBT9ST
3teFx4qZLNUgNaS9PDnxmhxQND8+KTHUbKNk3dHPF1B02BCYyXV4oDh3rxpeJk9rTVvt
srGSk2CDQ1DbWvLW+2YxF0pCIJUlL5vyhILEveD2dUR7pHAQvPXDDIu7LE9SLURkh3ad
8T7q3Go0aBiT+s5wyrW4FVJImIMviT1z3/PViRk7+RJb9bH009ShfgrtkmOpfWlG7yma
DZYg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=q78vzW4HOgmUP0xdLSbAAMsnV5a8dczRTsQXuxEIQhQ=;
b=azh21xEWLu00EKnv4nKkxZUjKM2V6ZmvVTCFNQPTbXemdKRqivBKq8dFktCKeKviSK
TPjfMM5JswrGDZ5Mdq7yjfcSRr9/uNBx9cGHc7M2CF+nLoVOVhdBI0VX6UD5j+L7KUkc
mO45NWB0OQXfp8lLw2WVm+WLFM8BmXmDMPNkj3ORXDcESL8VWNcI57cXSppJmeYZZ1hh
H5MdR2AcjXGuFYoJK2M/qtxY6UxybNTa9lrpN39dxxUi0anVlT/GU09sebpNCwHipaFs
07lD7eQpTus+mE8hxU9l7zbXAe9BvsEwLtVNyZUSB/sEU0N10VB52exjzG/7D+277NNb
K/mw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJLel+V9yNhKUct/jlRnvN2zOs9fhPaXtH3jDAZKqtBaK+iunt+yOn+wQFiUKYSZBrZB/261ylOdUvei0g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.90.212 with SMTP id o203mr18698484oib.117.1456932271587;
Wed, 02 Mar 2016 07:24:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.202.177.3 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 07:24:31 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <201603021514.36769.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <201603021456.15820.luke@dashjr.org>
<B9C659DC-1954-45C2-B3E6-552A17CDD655@Janik.cz>
<201603021514.36769.luke@dashjr.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 16:24:31 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJqsvLAZR9CmQ0=2heCFaF6Nb=91iQ+kUKtoq3eQ-gn_mVYpBw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsOpbWllIER1Ym9pcy1MYWNvc3Rl?= <jeremie.dl@gmail.com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM,
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
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 15:37:30 +0000
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Hardfork to fix difficulty drop algorithm
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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, 02 Mar 2016 15:24:33 -0000
> BtcDrak tells me he has well-tested code for this in his altcoin
Could you be more explicit, which altcoin is that?
> I am unaware of any reason this would be controversial
Probably not until you get to the details of any proposal. What is
your exact proposal here? Algorithm? Parameters?
As you likely know a too short time window would be dangerous for
other reasons. Getting to an agreement as to what is reasonable or not
is not necessarily trivial.
Jeremie
2016-03-02 16:14 GMT+01:00 Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>:
> On Wednesday, March 02, 2016 3:05:08 PM Pavel Jan=C3=ADk wrote:
>> > the network. This would result in a significantly longer block interva=
l,
>> > which also means a higher per-block transaction volume, which could
>> > cause the block size limit to legitimately be hit much sooner than
>> > expected.
>>
>> If this happens at all (the exchange rate of the coin can accomodate suc=
h
>> expectation),
>
> The exchange rate is not significantly influenced by these things.
> Historically, it seems fairly obvious that the difficulty has followed va=
lue,
> not value following difficulty.
>
>> the local fee market will develop, fees will raise and complement mined
>> coins, thus bringing more miners back to the game (together with expecte=
d
>> higher exchange rate).
>
> Depends on the hashrate drop, and tolerance for higher fees, both of whic=
h are
> largely unknown at this time. At least having code prepared for the negat=
ive
> scenarios in case of an emergency seems reasonable, even if we don't end =
up
> needing to deploy it.
>
> Luke
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
|
