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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1RAbFB-0001I5-Fx
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 03 Oct 2011 05:39:13 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.216.47 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.216.47; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
helo=mail-qw0-f47.google.com;
Received: from mail-qw0-f47.google.com ([209.85.216.47])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1RAbFA-0004PD-L4
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 03 Oct 2011 05:39:13 +0000
Received: by qadc1 with SMTP id c1so1663011qad.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sun, 02 Oct 2011 22:39:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.226.209 with SMTP id ix17mr10799787qcb.147.1317620347199;
Sun, 02 Oct 2011 22:39:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.214.144 with HTTP; Sun, 2 Oct 2011 22:39:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201110030132.21646.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <CAAS2fgRSw8ry7wjL5Fao1U+Ps0-6hfDcme_V_OCSkKaRTm2r9w@mail.gmail.com>
<201110030132.21646.luke@dashjr.org>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 01:39:07 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgSgH5eH+9eY8e=T946NRW10_aiWvDM523+HJgBL2zEgew@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(gmaxwell[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1RAbFA-0004PD-L4
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Supermajority mining votes for
valid->invalid changes.
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 05:39:13 -0000
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
> Perhaps as a safeguard:
> (3) Before applying the new rule, require 50% of the last Y blocks contai=
n a
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0coinbase with a "I am upgraded" code
> (4) Until the new rule is active, include an "I am upgraded" code in ever=
y
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0block; after it's active, this can be turned off
(4) is a nice idea.
I was hoping to avoid (3) simply because for any one of these upgrades
hopefully 95% of the network is neutral wrt the change because they
won't mine either form of the transactions.
The active statement has the benefit that it constitutes a proof: You
know with specific confidence (based on the window size) how likely a
fork of length X will be if a newly invalid transaction is announced
at the time of the activation.
|
