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 26A5DBFF for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2017 19:20:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mx-out03.mykolab.com (mx.kolabnow.com [95.128.36.1]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44F071A2 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2017 19:20:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kolabnow.com X-Spam-Score: -2.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx03.mykolab.com (mx03.mykolab.com [10.20.7.101]) by mx-out03.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6899E22050 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2017 21:20:38 +0200 (CEST) From: Tom Zander To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2017 21:20:39 +0200 Message-ID: <1521038.c5zslb6dar@cherry> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 14 Apr 2017 19:25:48 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] I do not support the BIP 148 UASF X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2017 19:20:42 -0000 On Friday, 14 April 2017 09:56:31 CEST Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Segwit was carefully engineered so that older unmodified miners could > continue operating _completely_ without interruption after segwit > activates. > They [Older nodes] can > upgrade to it [segwit] on their own schedule. The only risk > non-participating > miners take after segwit activation is that if someone else mines an > invalid block they would extend it, This is false, a segwit transaction to the miner you describe is an "everyone can spend" transaction, and as such a miner that does not validate the segregated area in a post-segwit world will be able to create blocks that will not validate for segwit miners by including a transaction that spends a SW tx. This would then lead to a chain-fork as the SW miners reject it and the non- SW miners continue to mine on it. -- Tom Zander Blog: https://zander.github.io Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel