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 73030F2D for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 20:58:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from nm26-vm0.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm26-vm0.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [98.139.213.74]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEAF5FC for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 20:58:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1450472328; bh=RSjcsQ6f+QITWd1I+NJ68TsW0WsU1vXU05D1jzxQjqM=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From:Subject; b=ALeTFlYDeS9tzp6/+2Pmu5l6c/RNDBWm0RvF0haQxXVnpneB/ZI3KxucuCHKmgQyApXAF2MUFrxCFB5bTXGHDms9vsKrCmP7f1hvJZ3+ojnjAnemO/hHd5RWD1Smp7tOZvxeERBHG3w6joLgB0uWJSrMrpO08iCLTL7so7b2qlEuwxp+lF7jlzr1pH9r0J9uXYZqsvDeNvqjWX7781zp7ounMmi7AYqPwoflCV57UtuPnES5rUINSXjGHIAWKQTwN+p+gQRQectJ3OzjEiOHkYf5FOPqpNHgN58IqKH5es/v293C/Nc1Lw2ZiS4na7goEXdNsP1QDV28t/ObrVH2iA== Received: from [66.196.81.172] by nm26.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Dec 2015 20:58:48 -0000 Received: from [98.139.211.163] by tm18.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Dec 2015 20:58:48 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp220.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Dec 2015 20:58:48 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 113159.6546.bm@smtp220.mail.bf1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: aIb..xwVM1nfzpJOZfifVwCXxPKbnRC_BK2ZT3x6bMV.hdT toUPZJkp_440oa0CHLtGgtKoJOrYY_LXngNbxw8ycsgroreGghNWN_OfeCUn dHJ.G8q9A_USclz6jbX_VOad3R1tJHEPsaKIsnS7_OPMFtn8ScWRa0EFGhV7 cGvRkCJ6SPvhmD2P1TTj3XdX10GQX14Ax_pGTeCHcR7hUoPC7CHcIy6Hn.6U 48xAVhYvyHXvDnaKMntI1HLEH4cZ9LMrDqbpl_wZzQLBJpCpBz38UJfQDDA3 LrpnlE8oNq2CBFAn2xH6CQsFnv5XNyHMfZ3KwfCUNo1vJmfHZaM1fcrAxykw CAGG4TSzw2wp.NrWxkStlqoU_qHKSNRZoXkZmz0.rRDtl58HCVOkcGALaA01 p2BckQ9TvBvqN9j4lIfCtak1YxHJZzmKvLcq47qZ_q3Bqj0hMeudlzdKaLY. uKvDwaCj1tuMq4NpoI.FXTZXkiCBE4ZFzxo.0gbnNPst7_KuE.yliSkzhDRm z1vkjhkSt0QAbL6ZUGqb4XcLE2EV9 X-Yahoo-SMTP: kMAkG6uswBCBwEfDAoIbXivsMA-- Message-ID: <1450472322.15256.7.camel@yahoo.com> From: gb To: Jeff Garzik Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 09:58:42 +1300 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.11 (3.12.11-1.fc21) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 08:36:55 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] The increase of max block size should be determined by block height instead of block time 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: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 20:58:49 -0000 On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 15:15 -0500, Jeff Garzik via bitcoin-dev wrote: > My preference is height activation + one step per block (i.e. also > height). Height seems KISS. > > Under this scheme the size of the step-per-block increase could be decreased every 210,000 blocks (at time of reward halvings). So, a linear growth rate that decreases every ~4 years, ultimately grandfathering max_block_size increases on the same block-schedule that reward decreases.