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 1F0B5956 for ; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 21:50:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from outmail149058.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail149058.authsmtp.co.uk [62.13.149.58]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 332DC112 for ; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 21:50:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-c247.authsmtp.com (mail-c247.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.247]) by punt20.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u9GLo3ut067392; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 22:50:03 +0100 (BST) Received: from petertodd.org (ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com [52.5.185.120]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u9GLo0e8012401 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 16 Oct 2016 22:50:00 +0100 (BST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9DDE14009A; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 21:45:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7A9D720A90; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 17:49:57 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 17:49:57 -0400 From: Peter Todd To: Pieter Wuille , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: <20161016214957.GA16291@fedora-21-dvm> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9amGYk9869ThD9tj" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Server-Quench: 7d12c34c-93ea-11e6-bcde-0015176ca198 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aAdMdwQUF1YAAgsB AmAbWVZeVV17WWI7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq T0pMXVMcUQwffUMB UxYeUxt2dwQIf3lz YQhlCnFZD0d+Jlt0 QRsFCGwHMGF9OjNL BV1YdwJRcQRMLU5E Y1gxNiYHcQ5VPz4z GA41ejw8IwAXEzhc WB1FMVMXTA4FGSR0 bTE6RGl2VQ0eSios LgBnQl4B X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1038:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 52.5.185.120/25 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. 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] Start time for BIP141 (segwit) 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: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 21:50:10 -0000 --9amGYk9869ThD9tj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 04:31:55PM +0200, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev wro= te: > Hello all, >=20 > We're getting ready for Bitcoin Core's 0.13.1 release - the first one > to include segregated witness (BIP 141, 143, 144, 145) for Bitcoin > mainnet, after being extensively tested on testnet and in other > software. Following the BIP9 recommendation [1] to set the versionbits > start time a month in the future and discussion in the last IRC > meeting [2], I propose we set BIP 141's start time to November 15, > 2016, 0:00 UTC (unix time 1479168000). Speaking as maintainer of python-bitcoinlib, ACK. Currently python-bitcoinlib doesn't have any support for segwit, although B= ob McElrath has had a pull-req open for it since July: https://github.com/petertodd/python-bitcoinlib/pull/112 I may or may not get time to finishing reviewing and merging that pull-req before segwit activates - I've been a rather distracted maintainer. But eit= her way, as has been explained elsewhere ad nauseam, segwit is backwards compat= ible with existing nodes and wallets so there's no rush to upgrade. For example, another project of mine - OpenTimestamps - also makes use of python-bitcoinlib for the relatively complex and hairy low-level code that extracts timestamp proofs from blocks, among other things. In fact, in the development of OpenTimestamps I had to fix a few minor bugs in python-bitcoinlib, because it exercised parts of the codebase that few other projects do. Yet the impact on segwit for OpenTimestamps will be zero - since segwit is a softfork it's 100% backwards compatible with existing software. Of course, = at some point in the future I'll probably get around to adding segwit support = to the software to reduce transaction fees, but there's no rush to do so. All = I'll be doing for segwit in the near future is upgrading the full nodes on the t= wo redundant OpenTimestamps calendar servers to v0.13.1, and even there I'll be able to stagger the upgrades to protect against the unlikely occurance of v0.13.1 having a bug that v0.13.0 doesn't. Again, staggering full-node upgr= ades is only possible because segwit is a soft-fork. --=20 https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org --9amGYk9869ThD9tj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYA/YCAAoJEGOZARBE6K+y6+EIAIAC3pYViNQ5KaB8J2Tp+9cL 4OGd8tChZVEN1jTOOhymrMN1C8KSSwHbrkxNRrhxFKoNtAYqNDrJAflAelACz8jK F6xeOwx4bLQhhOOIAtpqElZPi8YIdv/QVK3bpc4b6Z8X1pzgCPjZAYPZ6/rHIcs+ 3lgaBhqrQhm6ZHyVrjyTQrKJN+IkPJKcwnoSQyMMGrziZec9g+W/TDGwMN+u1BYp a7ByN1OqDIQlaKIgwQKta+4oxUP3Gv8cWEByeXekfcq1zQ803wqBLBTZ+/jf1R3s iPUUKAJwOqi1bjLmYDlp3peptjtLuqFn0aax5mfF6Nb8dhMbEMHQLHYMCYnvUW0= =4fW7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9amGYk9869ThD9tj--