From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63EE9B05 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 11:44:44 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from d.mail.sonic.net (d.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.50]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E433811D for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 11:44:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:::1] ([58.96.168.240]) (authenticated bits=0) by d.mail.sonic.net (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id tBEBiX8o010337 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 14 Dec 2015 03:44:36 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_70815113-0B5E-4436-8F65-1D74AE7631BF"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5.2 From: Jonathan Toomim In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 19:44:34 +0800 Message-Id: <05E42ED2-8F04-4018-B137-74D79BD46348@toom.im> References: To: Bitcoin Dev X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVaLTs3dpTgMVB2/Ymaa0It3ELLQvtYzcW2Yt0DwIBQmLzFxFjGAiZg4MdkENmNYV9oxLpTwpVIzt/8vgxAQo5s0 X-Sonic-ID: C;eI5cC1ii5RGdesgxU3XIUw== M;VHEUDVii5RGdesgxU3XIUw== X-Sonic-Spam-Details: 0.0/5.0 by cerberusd 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 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Segregated Witness features wish list X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 11:44:44 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_70815113-0B5E-4436-8F65-1D74AE7631BF Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 1. I think we should limit the sum of the block and witness data to = nBlockMaxSize*7/4 per block, for a maximum of 1.75 MB total. I don't = like the idea that SegWit would give us 1.75 MB of capacity in the = typical case, but we have to have hardware capable of 4 MB in = adversarial conditions (i.e. intentional multisig). I think a limit to = the segwit size allays that concern. 2. I think that segwit is a substantial change to how Bitcoin works, and = I very strongly believe that we should not rush this. It changes the = block structure, it changes the transaction structure, it changes the = network protocol, it changes SPV wallet software, it changes block = explorers, and it has changes that affect most other parts of the = Bitcoin ecosystem. After we decide to implement it, and have a final = version of the code that will be merged, we should give developers of = other Bitcoin software time to implement code that supports the new = transaction/witness formats. When you guys say "as soon as possible," what do you mean exactly? On Dec 10, 2015, at 2:47 PM, jl2012--- via bitcoin-dev = wrote: > It seems the current consensus is to implement Segregated Witness. SW = opens many new possibilities but we need a balance between new features = and deployment time frame. I'm listing by my priority: >=20 > 1-2 are about scalability and have highest priority >=20 > 1. Witness size limit: with SW we should allow a bigger overall block = size. It seems 2MB is considered to be safe for many people. However, = the exact size and growth of block size should be determined based on = testing and reasonable projection. >=20 > 2. Deployment time frame: I prefer as soon as possible, even if none = of the following new features are implemented. This is not only a = technical issue but also a response to the community which has been = waiting for a scaling solution for years >=20 --Apple-Mail=_70815113-0B5E-4436-8F65-1D74AE7631BF Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWbquiAAoJEIEuMk4MG0P1rfAH/i4tU1Lf8b4PGOZW468H43k/ oqvMiLy+T/HpKVMUZAh3xBbeo94qCjjdptWT2QzIRuXAhMOeapYmKFHrx7MwX2dW RuF6SMYY+rkO+ULXTzK+v5U8m/sOW6NfuJZ4mCv1TjBF21bkxzwHP3xgwNBcBVZ6 VU+G+mneZtAva/LUO2/ES4Jf4okrHU6bmWEJpgAce1jI/RJYcmVtG7BMy2Nz3wLb onFDe9M/0lKACNZQ94BwG17CX1P20p26R8pxwnU5zer0kNvUqUOtsHa8C7XjRIm2 4DPU/3hs3r0MoIiFZu3PacZhrA8k6IyEUpjI4/pvVb3mN058goQZQRRI1tAFTK0= =QP+K -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_70815113-0B5E-4436-8F65-1D74AE7631BF--