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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1Vdpi8-0002uq-HL
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 05 Nov 2013 23:07:00 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.217.182 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.217.182; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
helo=mail-lb0-f182.google.com;
Received: from mail-lb0-f182.google.com ([209.85.217.182])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Vdpi7-0000Yg-Lu
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 05 Nov 2013 23:07:00 +0000
Received: by mail-lb0-f182.google.com with SMTP id w6so7192982lbh.13
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 05 Nov 2013 15:06:53 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.140.193 with SMTP id ri1mr5651lab.23.1383692812914; Tue,
05 Nov 2013 15:06:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.112.63.164 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 15:06:52 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CANAnSg2sUfRH0mYEir_XKUz-iOYRpdzNgM-AJ7t-H=SOa4wBig@mail.gmail.com>
References: <N1-9eAtMHauq2@Safe-mail.net>
<CANAnSg2sUfRH0mYEir_XKUz-iOYRpdzNgM-AJ7t-H=SOa4wBig@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2013 15:06:52 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgTofL7ura17KjUR5pL_fOOM=a0gdZTZ7seVMRPOPi66xw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Drak <drak@zikula.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information. [URIs: zikula.org]
X-Headers-End: 1Vdpi7-0000Yg-Lu
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Possible Solution To SM Attack
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: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 23:07:00 -0000
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Drak <drak@zikula.org> wrote:
> If I understand the issue properly, this seems like a pretty elegant
> solution: if two blocks are broadcast within a certain period of eachother,
> chose the lower target. That's a provable fair way of randomly choosing the
> winning block and would seem like a pretty simply patch.
uh. and so when my solution is, by chance, unusually low... I am
incentivized to hurry up and release my block because?
I've simulated non-first-block-heard strategies in the past (in the
two nearly tied miner with network latency model) and they result in
significant increase in large (e.g. >>6 block) reorgs). It's easy to
make convergence worse or to create additional perverse incentives.
|
