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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1UJTxE-0004tm-Ab
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 23 Mar 2013 19:18:12 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.215.47 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.215.47; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
helo=mail-la0-f47.google.com;
Received: from mail-la0-f47.google.com ([209.85.215.47])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1UJTxD-0006hT-D3
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 23 Mar 2013 19:18:12 +0000
Received: by mail-la0-f47.google.com with SMTP id fj20so9049663lab.6
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sat, 23 Mar 2013 12:18:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.26.202 with SMTP id n10mr3337841lbg.15.1364066283913;
Sat, 23 Mar 2013 12:18:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.96.164 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 12:18:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+8xBpfzNYqFm-zCD8L7KDiL9x+ez-pUM3B3T981D1n69t8gQQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+8xBpcwLUt=RBYynbQDwY2Bv1keCPy0pdXP4+8CG-wqvrxOCA@mail.gmail.com>
<201303231709.07059.luke@dashjr.org>
<CA+8xBpc9n4_CDYTq80+u3V=sD+F-tTnc1NMVnK1Z_UnNix75dg@mail.gmail.com>
<201303231743.59510.luke@dashjr.org>
<CA+8xBpfzNYqFm-zCD8L7KDiL9x+ez-pUM3B3T981D1n69t8gQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 12:18:03 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgTq2xz6P1C8kk_HrWsKcJ8rsDSzF_4ceRS+ympj7K-SCA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@exmulti.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(gmaxwell[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1UJTxD-0006hT-D3
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Upcoming network event: block v2 lock-in
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 19:18:12 -0000
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@exmulti.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
>> Not for producing coinbases (where BIP 34 is implemented).
> Sure, that is largely the pool server layer. But it is misleading to
> imply that bitcoind is nowhere in the stack.
You're both right: BIP34's addition of the height is implemented in
the coinbase generator, so for almost everyone the Bitcoind version is
not very relevant for that. Rejection of invalid chains, however, is
in the Bitcoin daemon. Upgrading bitcoind alone should be sufficient
to prevent the creation of forks, though if miners would like to avoid
losing income they must update _both_ so that they don't create
invalid blocks or mine on invalid forks.
|
