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
|
Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 754C341C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 2 Apr 2017 11:43:57 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ua0-f172.google.com (mail-ua0-f172.google.com
[209.85.217.172])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADDB6D0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 2 Apr 2017 11:43:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ua0-f172.google.com with SMTP id 17so15226349uah.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 02 Apr 2017 04:43:56 -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; bh=Gh6AFVvF6Y0xeCjq7belO0LHAZL3CcvX2Gt4y02uvQI=;
b=cXP2/U73lHoOX1ZNgmUNF6+q/hpQx+0+trYUOhqw6ZRinGS1zbkEgtb9JFRWHrBwV1
jjwGXbFFKH4QuZDquuPIdeDihCYZtcqrOLxI7kwwyIurDDM3h0SoU5sDEk6K3AtguQXm
HTHKcL3cc9YbEG3Qz817cxsEl84fbCmpQCdbtNvfmJzyrhR0kKCxkiEvDA5aQACSuAGz
knugbee2Egw18LD02Y6Mgwo0D00cxwFhcuGQpFsRbuKKvKO6jmsDHx+2K34Nux1/fNUV
Zx3D32kSDK3h9cgvZj4vOTL4h/uC2LJP/DRUx73Xd3l/MGtNEJpfkFxe2PfaW8mXxhcn
6ccw==
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;
bh=Gh6AFVvF6Y0xeCjq7belO0LHAZL3CcvX2Gt4y02uvQI=;
b=HmdinhgrW3OQD6Jyk1ybBKrdxHZoIPHFpMTFdaF1LwdHFXLfWVWjHoBchRyEaXjMIQ
QbhWZDIdQRwXOC3tzv+NZBMomEsYcrj652MQuMrr/O1gUbTByDEqka7nkPJwq/6ql7av
X9EVDiMlnTiQZM0ObhaHgfLydSgm2nM1Pqtu3li6Hb28Ks2uK5XmxfjTbqezzmVjHXr9
y7kxaWp9tpf9XrHy0wjLWZpSw6DZINEtrvgrMci1K1oGi6c87VdUL9oiTq9YOaY/tRhm
f7GueEw5W5bTKqpYE1BTpdONDpDUJ9zZpt+4LTBGZNk5mUrYPr1whMmVms0GRuJn1a7M
9iag==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2hrc6RqxH2dTphiB0Q5sp/5zLQQt/hO9OIUuViiCfyaXHl6slx12mwpKzkyklSvc16/a4OZxHAjFOKrQ==
X-Received: by 10.176.16.73 with SMTP id g9mr4989753uab.78.1491133435632; Sun,
02 Apr 2017 04:43:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.31.151.136 with HTTP; Sun, 2 Apr 2017 04:43:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.31.151.136 with HTTP; Sun, 2 Apr 2017 04:43:54 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAt2M1_Ac4or_awrGTuYGEwLsJLP+_LBCsu2SubaJGr-f0BkoA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKzdR-oN6tGvGSb04_awCf=Jsf3wgKJN5xUhCr8G2D2W9YgJww@mail.gmail.com>
<1CF1FD5D-8D29-4783-823F-B3F588D5C5CE@mattcorallo.com>
<CAD1TkXse5O6nEw9-EPsNp4c56YJ+OnM=F1uf8w+tyB=_+hFzFQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKzdR-rFJNOZ856rA_q8C=zEUj_X561OSOwW+KZr4nRJ51w3HA@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDrAHo2P7t6SjituURqMUqs_=Lbp7X=g_j8nGoNKMKCRKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAt2M19PvHLY0PA6iy+wiPg10vqONDApTLDuxzEcte=KUZLoaQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDqw2TayGvaH_nz3jrF8Cz2V=SbB4begD6+K=Ye=Msw4mg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAt2M1_gDzEuDLSvVsJARvdCAtUyM3Yuu7TT25sbm3L-Zi6+0Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAt2M18=Tjw+05QCv6G7Abv=idB6ONgU9xvtrR=fn731452_mg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAt2M1835S3YYJ_p0_zvDR9U6EfYAt7SWTAEPNHnNfgstKpgMg@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDqMGBiwZppcyt6yF2sMJVs=nCr0M8u4H_22QDMR3wCFxQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAt2M1_Ac4or_awrGTuYGEwLsJLP+_LBCsu2SubaJGr-f0BkoA@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2017 13:43:54 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDpHKpU_nF_-7V59YhwqGnUc=2pXQNU9dDUq7wOvd7Uyyw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Natanael <natanael.l@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f403045e33b2be6e1b054c2d8e07
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, 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
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
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 <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: Sun, 02 Apr 2017 11:43:57 -0000
--f403045e33b2be6e1b054c2d8e07
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Just saying that we can talk in terms of weight alone after segwit. 8 mb
weight is much more clear than 2 mb size to me. 2 mb size seems to
obfuscate the actual new limit with the proposed hf, which simply 8 mb
weight.
On 2 Apr 2017 12:03 pm, "Natanael" <natanael.l@gmail.com> wrote:
> My point, if you missed it, is that there's a mathematical equivalence
> between using two limits (and calculating the ratio) vs using one limit and
> a ratio. The output is fully identical. The only difference is the order of
> operations. Saying there's no blocksize limit with this is pretty
> meaningless, because you're just saying you're using an abstraction that
> doesn't make the limit visible.
>
--f403045e33b2be6e1b054c2d8e07
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"auto">Just saying that we can talk in terms of weight alone aft=
er segwit. 8 mb weight is much more clear than 2 mb size to me. 2 mb size s=
eems to obfuscate the actual new limit with the proposed hf, which simply 8=
mb weight.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
On 2 Apr 2017 12:03 pm, "Natanael" <<a href=3D"mailto:natanael=
.l@gmail.com">natanael.l@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><=
blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px=
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto">My point, if you missed it,=
is that there's a mathematical equivalence between using two limits (a=
nd calculating the ratio) vs using one limit and a ratio. The output is ful=
ly identical. The only difference is the order of operations. Saying there&=
#39;s no blocksize limit with this is pretty meaningless, because you'r=
e just saying you're using an abstraction that doesn't make the lim=
it visible.=C2=A0</div>
</blockquote></div></div>
--f403045e33b2be6e1b054c2d8e07--
|
