path: root/f8/1af1f0f72ac5d88624ba0d3842196dd1ef35ec

Return-Path: <jeremy.l.rubin@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ACE3C000B
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat,  5 Mar 2022 16:19:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3555A81377
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat,  5 Mar 2022 16:19:43 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
 HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
 SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
 dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id dgTw1rhI1PH8
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat,  5 Mar 2022 16:19:42 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-lj1-x234.google.com (mail-lj1-x234.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::234])
 by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFF6981396
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat,  5 Mar 2022 16:19:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-lj1-x234.google.com with SMTP id x17so1573782ljd.4
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat, 05 Mar 2022 08:19:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
 h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=snYM/bMFRAXvEW5DJ6CL26KBtgBF7kIids+MwOjB3+0=;
 b=BNKVNMyZTkZmAtHG2OBjM7BEGH2oA2Kks5PPTVQVX5fle83wWO/6xm+3zIunE+/1wh
 rKwRexLH2eNSotHRuICzcepz/LbThx2Kz60gKahHch0XFr2DrZPuVC652V1MhaJ3sdjd
 Cn66LLtycmmPvW+Q+G8WUd+a2He8lbRvq5Dpn5CLCGfOdJI9SaazTPze9W2C/yJe4RiG
 4hj82GTqGHBWGkqBYj9Vg0GH8VGNi64OezxRaGhjx25K8Cx+e2yBvqPrOVTjce31SNZw
 nwpctIYtUM3udE5m48ZRU71AzD0d6KnzGPPjb2Yy3ywDpoB6/x9GFxpV/Yf4w3PM/hds
 xNyA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to;
 bh=snYM/bMFRAXvEW5DJ6CL26KBtgBF7kIids+MwOjB3+0=;
 b=QLhiLrEnaULKw+8lynodq3mlY00uS0XvU1NpAeoW7UBCTKbnPJ2cFr6OJxMi4XoE5z
 d72EOheTm2Ij/AitC7xlMikQBs9Yhv17zOB5RVzy4ZIgxi9hXQYYZegcdzykwod8pTKL
 5nsv6wHIYp001EXT7Zs7jcXprk/d4/7k4hAYvACCU17wBF1R28AZgYi9d5BItKVTOtb5
 O8kdXGizbLvg/5oimrPkksWQrEm+uNK89930wKM1rDNgDg3HYQwIQBumGOmwIHCG8LIB
 lRm1wkzm2skkzbrgxGkgQQyJsanVOVCr9uuIIiE2/ZBnv+FDMGFGKW1kC5gw+JmwvD+6
 6SBQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532GZAiRkh3GOwEErUcH1SyChPVNeB9DTd6kbCT/Pv/NoCV+W6WN
 Qgw9U/y8SiyCuv/1QuLlr78xI7AXN4c9/ap8+TM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxnJ/mkNZ4balCBWrixAkxdMzkj54GG6yWEnWb969ORhzLgMZoYPF3szlSfLbMDvoL5I10N3QdVYsTuTWUt/xg=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:aa14:0:b0:245:fd1d:4eba with SMTP id
 bf20-20020a2eaa14000000b00245fd1d4ebamr2367088ljb.425.1646497179538; Sat, 05
 Mar 2022 08:19:39 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <158234619-439597ed4ddc4a9f90ea573513b5f5a3@pmq4v.m5r2.onet>
In-Reply-To: <158234619-439597ed4ddc4a9f90ea573513b5f5a3@pmq4v.m5r2.onet>
From: Jeremy Rubin <jeremy.l.rubin@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2022 16:19:26 +0000
Message-ID: <CAD5xwhj-GcyRbtXd3kWoy-xA8NsePTxRQsQ5fJf+-yjSaESA2Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: vjudeu@gazeta.pl, 
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000829acd05d97aff79"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] One testnet to rule them all
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: Sat, 05 Mar 2022 16:19:43 -0000

--000000000000829acd05d97aff79
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

There's no point to pegging coins that are worthless into a system of also
worthless coins, unless you want to test the mechanism of testing pegging.

As is, it's hard enough to get people set up on a signet, if they have to
run two nodes and then scramble to find testnet coins and then peg them
were just raising the barriers to entry for starting to use a signet for
testing.


If anything I think we should permanently shutter testnet now that signet
is available.

On Sat, Mar 5, 2022, 3:53 PM vjudeu via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> In testnet3, anyone can become a miner, it is possible to even mine a
> block on some CPU, because the difficulty can drop to one. In signet, we
> create some challenge, for example 1-of-2 multisig, that can restrict who
> can mine, so that chain can be "unreliably reliable". Then, my question is:
> why signets are introducing new coins out of thin air, instead of forming
> two-way peg-in between testnet3 and signet?
>
> The lack of coins is not a bug, it is a feature. We have more halvings in
> testnet3 than in mainnet or signets, but it can be good, we can use this to
> see, what can happen with a chain after many halvings. Also, in testnet3
> there is no need to have any coins if we are mining. Miners can create,
> move and destroy zero satoshis. They can also extend the precision of the
> coins, so a single coin in testnet3 can be represented as a thousand of
> coins in some signet sidechain.
>
> Recently, there are some discussions regarding sidechains. Before they
> will become a real thing, running on mainnet, they should be tested.
> Nowadays, a popular way of testing new features is creating a new signet
> with new rules. But the question still remains: why we need new coins,
> created out of thin air? And even when some signet wants to do that, then
> why it is not pegged into testnet3? Then it would have as much chainwork
> protection as testnet3!
>
> It seems that testnet3 is good enough to represent the main chain during
> sidechain testing. It is permissionless and open, anyone can start mining
> sidechain blocks, anyone with a CPU can be lucky and find a block with the
> minimal difficulty. Also, because of blockstorms and regular chain reorgs,
> some extreme scenarios, like stealing all coins from some sidechain, can be
> tested in a public way, because that "unfriendly and unstable" environment
> can be used to test stronger attacks than in a typical chain.
>
> Putting that proposal into practice can be simple and require just
> creating one Taproot address per signet in testnet3. Then, it is possible
> to create one testnet transaction (every three months) that would move
> coins to and from testnet3, so the same coins could travel between many
> signets. New signets can be pegged in with 1:1 ratio, existing signets can
> be transformed into signet sidechains (the signet miners rule that chains,
> so they can enforce any transition rules they need).
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>

--000000000000829acd05d97aff79
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"auto">There&#39;s no point to pegging coins that are worthless =
into a system of also worthless coins, unless you want to test the mechanis=
m of testing pegging.<div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">As is, i=
t&#39;s hard enough to get people set up on a signet, if they have to run t=
wo nodes and then scramble to find testnet coins and then peg them were jus=
t raising the barriers to entry for starting to use a signet for testing.</=
div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"aut=
o">If anything I think we should permanently shutter testnet now that signe=
t is available.</div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" =
class=3D"gmail_attr">On Sat, Mar 5, 2022, 3:53 PM vjudeu via bitcoin-dev &l=
t;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@list=
s.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_qu=
ote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex=
">In testnet3, anyone can become a miner, it is possible to even mine a blo=
ck on some CPU, because the difficulty can drop to one. In signet, we creat=
e some challenge, for example 1-of-2 multisig, that can restrict who can mi=
ne, so that chain can be &quot;unreliably reliable&quot;. Then, my question=
 is: why signets are introducing new coins out of thin air, instead of form=
ing two-way peg-in between testnet3 and signet?<br>
<br>
The lack of coins is not a bug, it is a feature. We have more halvings in t=
estnet3 than in mainnet or signets, but it can be good, we can use this to =
see, what can happen with a chain after many halvings. Also, in testnet3 th=
ere is no need to have any coins if we are mining. Miners can create, move =
and destroy zero satoshis. They can also extend the precision of the coins,=
 so a single coin in testnet3 can be represented as a thousand of coins in =
some signet sidechain.<br>
<br>
Recently, there are some discussions regarding sidechains. Before they will=
 become a real thing, running on mainnet, they should be tested. Nowadays, =
a popular way of testing new features is creating a new signet with new rul=
es. But the question still remains: why we need new coins, created out of t=
hin air? And even when some signet wants to do that, then why it is not peg=
ged into testnet3? Then it would have as much chainwork protection as testn=
et3!<br>
<br>
It seems that testnet3 is good enough to represent the main chain during si=
dechain testing. It is permissionless and open, anyone can start mining sid=
echain blocks, anyone with a CPU can be lucky and find a block with the min=
imal difficulty. Also, because of blockstorms and regular chain reorgs, som=
e extreme scenarios, like stealing all coins from some sidechain, can be te=
sted in a public way, because that &quot;unfriendly and unstable&quot; envi=
ronment can be used to test stronger attacks than in a typical chain.<br>
<br>
Putting that proposal into practice can be simple and require just creating=
 one Taproot address per signet in testnet3. Then, it is possible to create=
 one testnet transaction (every three months) that would move coins to and =
from testnet3, so the same coins could travel between many signets. New sig=
nets can be pegged in with 1:1 ratio, existing signets can be transformed i=
nto signet sidechains (the signet miners rule that chains, so they can enfo=
rce any transition rules they need).<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank" =
rel=3D"noreferrer">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundati=
on.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>

--000000000000829acd05d97aff79--