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
|
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F0B5956
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 16 Oct 2016 21:50:10 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail149058.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail149058.authsmtp.co.uk
[62.13.149.58])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 332DC112
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 16 Oct 2016 21:50:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c247.authsmtp.com (mail-c247.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.247])
by punt20.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u9GLo3ut067392;
Sun, 16 Oct 2016 22:50:03 +0100 (BST)
Received: from petertodd.org (ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com
[52.5.185.120]) (authenticated bits=0)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u9GLo0e8012401
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
Sun, 16 Oct 2016 22:50:00 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9DDE14009A;
Sun, 16 Oct 2016 21:45:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 7A9D720A90; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 17:49:57 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 17:49:57 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <20161016214957.GA16291@fedora-21-dvm>
References: <CAPg+sBjdyJ297-GZvVc-wQwCEX-cRAGTNWDd92SgVzdCcD_ZMw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9amGYk9869ThD9tj"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAPg+sBjdyJ297-GZvVc-wQwCEX-cRAGTNWDd92SgVzdCcD_ZMw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-Server-Quench: 7d12c34c-93ea-11e6-bcde-0015176ca198
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aAdMdwQUF1YAAgsB AmAbWVZeVV17WWI7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq
T0pMXVMcUQwffUMB UxYeUxt2dwQIf3lz YQhlCnFZD0d+Jlt0
QRsFCGwHMGF9OjNL BV1YdwJRcQRMLU5E Y1gxNiYHcQ5VPz4z
GA41ejw8IwAXEzhc WB1FMVMXTA4FGSR0 bTE6RGl2VQ0eSios LgBnQl4B
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1038:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 52.5.185.120/25
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Start time for BIP141 (segwit)
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, 16 Oct 2016 21:50:10 -0000
--9amGYk9869ThD9tj
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 04:31:55PM +0200, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev wro=
te:
> Hello all,
>=20
> We're getting ready for Bitcoin Core's 0.13.1 release - the first one
> to include segregated witness (BIP 141, 143, 144, 145) for Bitcoin
> mainnet, after being extensively tested on testnet and in other
> software. Following the BIP9 recommendation [1] to set the versionbits
> start time a month in the future and discussion in the last IRC
> meeting [2], I propose we set BIP 141's start time to November 15,
> 2016, 0:00 UTC (unix time 1479168000).
Speaking as maintainer of python-bitcoinlib, ACK.
Currently python-bitcoinlib doesn't have any support for segwit, although B=
ob
McElrath has had a pull-req open for it since July:
https://github.com/petertodd/python-bitcoinlib/pull/112
I may or may not get time to finishing reviewing and merging that pull-req
before segwit activates - I've been a rather distracted maintainer. But eit=
her
way, as has been explained elsewhere ad nauseam, segwit is backwards compat=
ible
with existing nodes and wallets so there's no rush to upgrade.
For example, another project of mine - OpenTimestamps - also makes use of
python-bitcoinlib for the relatively complex and hairy low-level code that
extracts timestamp proofs from blocks, among other things. In fact, in the
development of OpenTimestamps I had to fix a few minor bugs in
python-bitcoinlib, because it exercised parts of the codebase that few other
projects do.
Yet the impact on segwit for OpenTimestamps will be zero - since segwit is a
softfork it's 100% backwards compatible with existing software. Of course, =
at
some point in the future I'll probably get around to adding segwit support =
to
the software to reduce transaction fees, but there's no rush to do so. All =
I'll
be doing for segwit in the near future is upgrading the full nodes on the t=
wo
redundant OpenTimestamps calendar servers to v0.13.1, and even there I'll be
able to stagger the upgrades to protect against the unlikely occurance of
v0.13.1 having a bug that v0.13.0 doesn't. Again, staggering full-node upgr=
ades
is only possible because segwit is a soft-fork.
--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
--9amGYk9869ThD9tj
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYA/YCAAoJEGOZARBE6K+y6+EIAIAC3pYViNQ5KaB8J2Tp+9cL
4OGd8tChZVEN1jTOOhymrMN1C8KSSwHbrkxNRrhxFKoNtAYqNDrJAflAelACz8jK
F6xeOwx4bLQhhOOIAtpqElZPi8YIdv/QVK3bpc4b6Z8X1pzgCPjZAYPZ6/rHIcs+
3lgaBhqrQhm6ZHyVrjyTQrKJN+IkPJKcwnoSQyMMGrziZec9g+W/TDGwMN+u1BYp
a7ByN1OqDIQlaKIgwQKta+4oxUP3Gv8cWEByeXekfcq1zQ803wqBLBTZ+/jf1R3s
iPUUKAJwOqi1bjLmYDlp3peptjtLuqFn0aax5mfF6Nb8dhMbEMHQLHYMCYnvUW0=
=4fW7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--9amGYk9869ThD9tj--
|
