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
|
Return-Path: <j@toom.im>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B5D3DFE5
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 26 Dec 2015 23:06:50 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from d.mail.sonic.net (d.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.50])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58955A5
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 26 Dec 2015 23:06:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.190] (63.135.62.197.nwinternet.com [63.135.62.197]
(may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0)
by d.mail.sonic.net (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id tBQN6lSQ021515
(version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT);
Sat, 26 Dec 2015 15:06:48 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
boundary="Apple-Mail=_3EFA4552-CD49-45BC-952A-7A24993D091A";
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5.2
From: Jonathan Toomim <j@toom.im>
In-Reply-To: <CAPg+sBhxnxnQQ-SpWuJ-+_uxRwXkgcU07jkYdZ8BcBwVDyW-vg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2015 15:07:17 -0800
Message-Id: <2D7C4E00-7451-45B6-94B6-07A7230FBF88@toom.im>
References: <CADm_WcasDuBsop55ZWcTb2FvccaoREg8K032rUjgQUQhQ3g=XA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBi=Mw7UnxG1-0-0ZTRqxrS5+28VmowyYrGP2MAvYiu_pA@mail.gmail.com>
<CADm_WcbrMyk-=OnQ-3UvnF_8brhn+X2NqRPbo5xUXsbcZpc0=Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBjbATqf8DXGF7obw9a=371zQ_S0EgTapnUmukAVenTneQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+c4Zozac8=aMrAJ1N_6SR9eBD+w0e70cEnk9CG_2oZ72AS-8g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBhsKD8jd9Y9+ngXY5tKUheO3d4P1b47eYL=Uzpat+KJ2w@mail.gmail.com>
<751DFAA9-9013-4C54-BC1E-5F7ECB7469CC@gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBiT5=ss9e=iac6J-A=85okF0zxMeV7H4z9-Qfx3CAWHXA@mail.gmail.com>
<246AA3BE-570D-4B88-A63D-AC76CB2B0CB8@toom.im>
<CAPg+sBhxnxnQQ-SpWuJ-+_uxRwXkgcU07jkYdZ8BcBwVDyW-vg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVYGrfQKsvSCvgCRdC3Xwk7Kw4J8n35L3gVu0QJofoJ3xrahbikmP8WYjHkF59GvA4pyzQdjl0FVlAn5+8OOjk6t
X-Sonic-ID: C;UGiNViWs5RGxjMgxU3XIUw== M;FPEXVyWs5RGxjMgxU3XIUw==
X-Sonic-Spam-Details: 3.8/5.0 by cerberusd
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE,
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
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Block size: It's economics & user preparation &
moral hazard
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: Sat, 26 Dec 2015 23:06:50 -0000
--Apple-Mail=_3EFA4552-CD49-45BC-952A-7A24993D091A
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Apple-Mail=_6E020B0A-9FC6-4801-A433-4B10C1906168"
--Apple-Mail=_6E020B0A-9FC6-4801-A433-4B10C1906168
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
On Dec 26, 2015, at 3:01 PM, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com> =
wrote:
> I think that's extremely short, even assuming there is no controversy =
about changing the rules at all. Things like BIP65 and BIP66 already =
took significantly longer than that, were uncontroversial, and only need =
miner adoption. Full node adoption is even slower.
>=20
BIP65 and BIP66 were uncontroversial, but also generally uninteresting. =
Most people don't care about OP_CLTV right now, and they won't for quite =
a while longer. They neglect to upgrade their full nodes because there =
has been no reason to.
Given that a supermajority of users and miners have been asking for a =
hard fork to increase the blocksize for years, I do not think that =
mobilizing people to upgrade their nodes is going to be hard.
When we do the hard fork, we will need to encourage people to upgrade =
their full nodes. We may want to request that miners not trigger the =
fork until some percentage of visible full nodes have upgraded.
--Apple-Mail=_6E020B0A-9FC6-4801-A433-4B10C1906168
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=us-ascii
<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Dus-ascii"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: =
after-white-space;"><div>On Dec 26, 2015, at 3:01 PM, Pieter Wuille =
<<a =
href=3D"mailto:pieter.wuille@gmail.com">pieter.wuille@gmail.com</a>> =
wrote:</div><div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><p dir=3D"ltr">I think that's extremely short, even =
assuming there is no controversy about changing the rules at all. Things =
like BIP65 and BIP66 already took significantly longer than that, were =
uncontroversial, and only need miner adoption. Full node adoption is =
even slower.</p></blockquote><br></div><div>BIP65 and BIP66 were =
uncontroversial, but also generally uninteresting. Most people don't =
care about OP_CLTV right now, and they won't for quite a while longer. =
They neglect to upgrade their full nodes because there has been no =
reason to. </div><div><br></div><div>Given that a supermajority of =
users and miners have been asking for a hard fork to increase the =
blocksize for years, I do not think that mobilizing people to upgrade =
their nodes is going to be hard.</div><div><br></div><div>When we do the =
hard fork, we will need to encourage people to upgrade their full nodes. =
We may want to request that miners not trigger the fork until some =
percentage of visible full nodes have upgraded.</div></body></html>=
--Apple-Mail=_6E020B0A-9FC6-4801-A433-4B10C1906168--
--Apple-Mail=_3EFA4552-CD49-45BC-952A-7A24993D091A
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWfx2lAAoJEIEuMk4MG0P1Gr8H/ikECfr+h9wqD4UAUMdsz7SZ
azJOtjLMG5PYFCmvkzjSmerRtU2QYt3NP0VflbopmHyGzLqJJCRW9USOR0NrcvIT
RjDTXeW+eQaXCjXvCDH6wt4zIVMlL7oetybS+0aG+kwsai4QUM88bbBF6IaKsC+G
MLCzIfWacflME08u2n5isv+mRSzp/Xc+MmPj0ranVnVAHxzSefJIz+bnORRLcaTT
DT0QaNDm8PcBgJDyvp7jMPztvxMDXwPa3HbDNYNQVvmBFVMLKU/QhG05cAmv8WK3
MGeW9wRXdBWB87+bjo2ZtpVuXk9jra8g/uPDOMAfnGWAoPDsDw09CbQS6ro5lTc=
=DRIZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Apple-Mail=_3EFA4552-CD49-45BC-952A-7A24993D091A--
|
