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
|
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 601128CC
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 18:33:59 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-la0-f47.google.com (mail-la0-f47.google.com
[209.85.215.47])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C23201C3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 18:33:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by lagz9 with SMTP id z9so8508812lag.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 11:33:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=9cG3JHnvnGPQQUpBR4xaQ1bM3VRf0zLvp2LTPjF/iAU=;
b=HPuSGWoGJtupysvYhSB/4AazACnYYB7NSJ0j874yT3XhhxNhRLMITxwDKqe7Rb5ka0
3Rnq1FrmrMLnJU1jafY8vszWtqTpETuG5uiHtvOjSW6wfEoZETpsKIs1F2vW4ALBsPhw
eF6NmbFWhNMQtL8goBvqpKKxdFQhnJ0SzQKnq1S9fRl+zsGHoJfGMulBQkiA3zZ5alA7
s9oH+2l9t+J51ivF7YcuRCpx2iw2zhKRANa5YJ/N8LEibk+7pxBSWMXBhXg31qDUFDdz
qfFvB3NlToH5RYRXk2H+R0PlMkeqmC3oX2JQIRiHBEZmFqTnFsotLDnlgCzpXbeDTFCd
XWMw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk22AOATwneFU5tFiYbqFNMJR3fqPdiYVRqm6La9y/fUQI9vQN9N56xmcNl75nY/RNeGQo4
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.37.196 with SMTP id a4mr13049248lak.59.1440009237345;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 11:33:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.15.22 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 11:33:57 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAJN5wHWCst=SmRA-Pu7fmJwxtL9aneCx_hkdDV0Nt7-fAjr5QA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <d17549688c0c747b2077c1f6f96b6445@xbt.hk>
<CAJN5wHV-qyOcEw5spQc74nT7_b29WMiDTmi4Jj0ri_rGCQz2ng@mail.gmail.com>
<E9543641-9D73-4A00-9CB3-FAB62BFB490E@gmail.com>
<CAJN5wHXRwQZ6YmiZiCE9Gx4d-3FTzy1Zv7i2noia0mwtRwVL+w@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDp69g8H4Was2qzixPq3qwQ_smzzeFpE+y2GYEK6F4kUrw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJN5wHWCst=SmRA-Pu7fmJwxtL9aneCx_hkdDV0Nt7-fAjr5QA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 20:33:57 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDr737EmUxYnHG6e-QJohRkyiMoXw38yVyyPGME-YvwaJg@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Danny Thorpe <danny.thorpe@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin is an experiment. Why don't we have an
experimental hardfork?
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: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 18:33:59 -0000
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Danny Thorpe <danny.thorpe@gmail.com> wrote:
> How do "big-block" testnet nodes running this 6382 rev recognize each other
> on the peer network? If I set up a 2MB block limit testnet node and -addnode
> another 2MB block testnet node (say, JornC's node) to it, and my node mines
> a block stuffed with 1.3MB of test txs, the other "big-block" node should
> accept my mined block, but it will be rejected / immediately orphaned by the
> rest of the testnet network because it exceeds their notion of block size
> limit, correct?
I have (hopefully) answered your questions in the other thread.
Review/testing of #6235 would be also appreciated (to hopefully
eventually merge the full #6382 branch into bitcoin/master).
|
