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 242D889E for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 21:11:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [192.3.11.21]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDE6A134 for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 21:11:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:5:265:61b6:56a6:b03d:28d6]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5594C38A6FC2; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 21:11:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Hashcash: 1:25:151114:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::lSmbjWilGzP9SG=3:cHcm X-Hashcash: 1:25:151114:jtimon@jtimon.cc::dVrH9F7CZpbuMbPv:vzKX X-Hashcash: 1:25:151114:adam@cypherspace.org::qj0z6nOmuFAsvMZN:Cur7 X-Hashcash: 1:25:151114:johnsock@gmail.com::4bKd1vzoT3aR46+1:QOTd From: Luke Dashjr To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Jorge =?iso-8859-15?q?Tim=F3n?= Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 21:11:22 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.1.9-gentoo-r1; KDE/4.14.8; x86_64; ; ) References: <201511132228.47815.luke@dashjr.org> In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <201511142111.24046.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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 Cc: John Sacco Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - Block size doubles at each reward halving with max block size of 32M 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: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 21:11:36 -0000 On Saturday, November 14, 2015 10:52:12 AM Jorge Tim=F3n via bitcoin-dev wr= ote: > Currently bip99 recommends 95% miner upgrade confirmation with version bi= ts > (bip9) for uncontroversial hardforks just like it does for uncontroversial > softforks. It is true that in the case of hardforks miners don't decide a= nd > it's the whole economy who has to upgrade before activation, but "the who= le > economy" and "all users" includes miners, so why not use the only upgrade > confirmation mechanism that we have available? Actually, the economy does not necessarily include miners, and in fact the= =20 present miner community for the most part does not overlap significantly wi= th=20 economic activity. And at the same time, miners also have a tendency to=20 upgrade at a different rate than the economy. It might make sense to=20 incorporate a miner-trigger, but *only if* the flag is enabled in nodes by = an=20 option disabled by default, and the BIP clearly specifies that miners must = not=20 enable it until they perceive complete economic adoption of the change. Luke