From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::137]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A253C002D for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 05:42:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10E9C416F7 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 05:42:24 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gyeT9PGGAW0D for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 05:42:22 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from azure.erisian.com.au (azure.erisian.com.au [172.104.61.193]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB3C14160F for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 05:42:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from aj@azure.erisian.com.au (helo=sapphire.erisian.com.au) by azure.erisian.com.au with esmtpsa (Exim 4.92 #3 (Debian)) id 1njDxq-0007lL-2p; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 15:42:19 +1000 Received: by sapphire.erisian.com.au (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 26 Apr 2022 15:42:14 +1000 Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 15:42:14 +1000 From: Anthony Towns To: Keagan McClelland , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: <20220426054214.GA7933@erisian.com.au> References: <20220330042106.GA13161@erisian.com.au> <20220411130522.GA3633@erisian.com.au> <20220424121429.GA7363@erisian.com.au> <20220425170012.GA7453@erisian.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Spam-Score-int: -18 X-Spam-Bar: - Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Speedy Trial X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 05:42:24 -0000 On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:26:09AM -0600, Keagan McClelland via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > Semi-mandatory in that only "threshold" blocks must signal, so if > only 4% or 9% of miners aren't signalling and the threshold is set > at 95% or 90%, no blocks will be orphaned. > How do nodes decide on which blocks are orphaned if only some of them have > to signal, and others don't? Is it just any block that would cause the > whole threshold period to fail? Yes, exactly those. See [0] or [1]. [0] https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0008.mediawiki#Mandatory_signalling [1] https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1021 (err, you apparently acked that PR) Cheers, aj