From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Yqv8A-0008TR-6S for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 09 May 2015 03:08:46 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org designates 62.13.148.111 as permitted sender) client-ip=62.13.148.111; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org; helo=outmail148111.authsmtp.net; Received: from outmail148111.authsmtp.net ([62.13.148.111]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1Yqv88-00062k-OS for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 09 May 2015 03:08:46 +0000 Received: from mail-c237.authsmtp.com (mail-c237.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.237]) by punt18.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t4938b18079925; Sat, 9 May 2015 04:08:37 +0100 (BST) Received: from savin.petertodd.org (75-119-251-161.dsl.teksavvy.com [75.119.251.161]) (authenticated bits=128) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t4938Xv2054790 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 9 May 2015 04:08:36 +0100 (BST) Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 23:08:33 -0400 From: Peter Todd To: Tier Nolan Message-ID: <20150509030833.GA28871@savin.petertodd.org> References: <554BE0E1.5030001@bluematt.me> <20150508163701.GA27417@savin.petertodd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Server-Quench: af3ebe60-f5f8-11e4-9f74-002590a135d3 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aAdMdgsUFVQNAgsB AmMbW1BeUFV7WmU7 bA9PbARUfEhLXhtr VklWR1pVCwQmRRgI BRZ2FBtycgFBcX4+ bERrWT4KCkcvJxN7 QlMCEDsOeGZhPWQC WRZfcx5UcAFPdx8U a1N6AHBDAzANdhES HhM4ODE3eDlSNilR RRkIIFQOdA4hGjk3 RFg5HCciVWwDTD8+ JgcrYmQRBVsQKEg3 PF09Qjp/ X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1024:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 75.119.251.161/587 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) 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 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.0 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address X-Headers-End: 1Yqv88-00062k-OS Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase Requirements X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 May 2015 03:08:46 -0000 --d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 08:47:52PM +0100, Tier Nolan wrote: > On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Peter Todd wrote: >=20 > > The soft-limit is there miners themselves produce smaller blocks; the > > soft-limit does not prevent other miners from producing larger blocks. > > >=20 > I wonder if having a "miner" flag would be good for the network. Makes it trivial to find miners and DoS attack them - a huge risk to the network as a whole, as well as the miners. Right now pools already get DoSed all the time through their work submission systems; getting DoS attacked via their nodes as well would be a disaster. > When in "miner mode", the client would reject 4MB blocks and wouldn't bui= ld > on them. The reference client might even track the miner and the non-min= er > chain tip. >=20 > Miners would refuse to build on 5MB blocks, but merchants and general use= rs > would accept them. That'd be an excellent way to double-spend merchants, significantly increasing the chance that the double-spend would succeed as you only have to get sufficient hashing power to get the lucky blocks; you don't need enough hashing power to *also* ensure those blocks don't become the longest chain, removing the need to sybil attack your target. --=20 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 000000000000000004bd67400df7577a30e6f509b6bd82633efeabe6395eb65a --d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGrBAEBCACVBQJVTXotXhSAAAAAABUAQGJsb2NraGFzaEBiaXRjb2luLm9yZzAw MDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwNGJkNjc0MDBkZjc1NzdhMzBlNmY1MDliNmJkODI2MzNl ZmVhYmU2Mzk1ZWI2NWEvFIAAAAAAFQARcGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3JncGV0 ZUBwZXRlcnRvZC5vcmcACgkQJIFAPaXwkfv4Ewf8C/v8qJPB8E5yG+rrcE0pCPWZ 1RfKQPc9OUpPBR1z9EZJvXzBaEVJbjot+y9/yWJk2vKyuObYPqZ5vO3HuWTJncVe OyCeHUGako19zfkPbCglx4gqbPF7fBJeFcQSYZh3wTbNjpeGYCbECUuZMeHLEBaD Amvh253wA323BdrRtsHb5TXCAFmeWAgRYje9ZbzmmnwSCl1BY+EC7wWMJ8NESwiA 0eay6sCo6zVCGZb4yIBwIuzy2LieWrTfpM6xIgDIcfGfU+mAxZg3zx0Iub7RBaM9 THhG279I+83L0bDD//351dAT4FUSEobmZ28wWb2f7V2CiwaagNIIuQC4g5bM5w== =zVNS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND--