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
|
Return-Path: <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5B64C0001
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 3 Mar 2021 16:50:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with UTF8SMTP id CF92446F1F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 3 Mar 2021 16:50:01 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mattcorallo.com
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with UTF8SMTP id 1yS7EdulwCzU
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 3 Mar 2021 16:50:00 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail.as397444.net (mail.as397444.net [69.59.18.99])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPS id 720ED46EFC
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 3 Mar 2021 16:50:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail.as397444.net (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPSA id 1B0514C5D7E;
Wed, 3 Mar 2021 16:49:58 +0000 (UTC)
X-DKIM-Note: Keys used to sign are likely public at https://as397444.net/dkim/
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mattcorallo.com;
s=1614788463; t=1614790198;
bh=w1jUx3xhRGq8nRjz7PiR1xNWnSr0N0UAAJ9jj6ztz9E=;
h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From;
b=lVYyBoKsBPOkyFWaDHqSkuv9ptoKpOVopb/7D37XxqqrR87fS/FaJJOY2ZIIsQcom
cnphldT1JVKgIvRMLGT3D55SEggBDnmAn1Z2jZQhCgPF8UusCt9IRuG5iPLnQvuvtR
gF2kn2MmXiDE7CcUsc75Sx/l/kMYP5ew6+/EAR3gkFMXdZfaSzT6vPHFxLc5an8NWX
RuodBDC7B7ZxEXmo4ojWSCxmu5v/wSQ07UvEfbN3+/sHPTQdIdQbkNZb8tZNqYyCoH
BfllIjE6dGc2LtmvJtPzhhYYcupSDYgS5lIBB2WKm+CHSLb792HQ2dZqIgC6nQYse+
0wHNVaNxBrKbQ==
Message-ID: <281679eb-860b-c6cb-7e7a-5ae28b60f149@mattcorallo.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 11:49:57 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
References: <c35e1761-43ca-e157-6a5c-72d27f2c6c6e@mattcorallo.com>
<20210303145902.cl4mzg6l7avjboil@erisian.com.au>
From: Matt Corallo <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210303145902.cl4mzg6l7avjboil@erisian.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Straight Flag Day (Height) Taproot Activation
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 16:50:02 -0000
On 3/3/21 09:59, Anthony Towns wrote:
> I think it would be worthwhile to also update getblocktemplate so that
> miners signal uptake for something like three or four retarget periods
> prior to activation, without that signalling having any consensus-level
> effect. That should allow miners and businesses to adjust their
> expectations for how much hashpower might not be enforcing taproot rules
> when generating blocks -- potentially allowing miners to switch pools
> to one running an up to date node, pools to reduce the amount of time
> they spend mining on top of unvalidated headers, businesses to increase
> confirmation requirements or prepare for the possibility of an increase
> in invalid-block entries in their logs, etc.
I strongly agree. Ideally such signaling could be placed in the witness nonce, however this may require pool updates to
ensure pool server software is not assuming the 32-byte-0-nonce in wide use today. It is a worthwhile change in any
case, as it avoids the need to change pool software for future forks which place commitments in the nonce.
>> 2) The high node-level-adoption bar is one of the most critical goals, and
>> the one most currently in jeopardy in a BIP 8 approach.
>
> A couple of days ago I would have disagreed with this; but with Luke
> now strongly pushing against implementing lot=false, I can at least see
> your point...
Right. It may be the case that the minority group threatening to fork off onto a lot=true chain is not large enough to
give a second thought to. However, I'm not certain that its worth the risk, and, as Chris noted in his post this
morning, that approach is likely to include more drama.
Matt
|
