public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
To: "Hampus Sjöberg" <hampus.sjoberg@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Dynamic MaxBlockSize - 3 Byte Solution
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 19:56:15 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201911111956.16782.luke@dashjr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFMkqK8fuB0BSpVsSnzgBv1WkZx_8Wqi4BQ6dL95PeGExM1nHQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Monday 11 November 2019 17:10:16 Hampus Sjöberg wrote:
> > It ISN'T low right now...
>
> I agree, but I don't think it's a good idea to softfork it to lower than 4M
> WU though, and I don't think we need to;
> hopefully when exchanges start using Lightning or Liquid, avg blocksize
> will go down.

Not likely, so long as spam continues to pad blocks full.

> > Extension blocks are not softforks, and are unreasonably convoluted for
> no
> real gain. When the time comes, the block size should be increased only
> using
> a hardfork.
>
> It depends on how you define soft and hardforks, I suspect you don't see
> extension blocks as a softforks because old nodes won't maintain a correct
> UTXO set.
> I think an extension block is a softfork because old nodes will still be
> able to follow the mainchain.

Softforks leave old nodes *working*, so yes, maintaining the correct UTXO 
state.

Simply "following" is meaningless, as even soft-hardforks are "followed".

> I don't know if a blocksize increase hardfork will get consensus as the
> idea has been ruined by all malicious hijack attempts we've seen over the
> years.

If there isn't consensus, then it shouldn't be done, period.

Luke


  reply	other threads:[~2019-11-11 19:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-11-07  3:33 [bitcoin-dev] Dynamic MaxBlockSize - 3 Byte Solution Trevor Groves
2019-11-08 14:36 ` Emil Engler
2019-11-08 15:19   ` Joachim Strömbergson
2019-11-08 17:04     ` Alberto Aldave
2019-11-11 16:08   ` Hampus Sjöberg
2019-11-11 16:47     ` Luke Dashjr
2019-11-11 17:10       ` Hampus Sjöberg
2019-11-11 19:56         ` Luke Dashjr [this message]
2019-11-11 13:52 ` ZmnSCPxj

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=201911111956.16782.luke@dashjr.org \
    --to=luke@dashjr.org \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=hampus.sjoberg@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox