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 EE5A6259 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 04:27:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from s47.web-hosting.com (s47.web-hosting.com [199.188.200.16]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C9FB139 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 04:27:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:49049 helo=server47.web-hosting.com) by server47.web-hosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1Zt6ik-003tuw-Vt; Sun, 01 Nov 2015 23:27:51 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2015 23:27:50 -0500 From: jl2012@xbt.hk To: Luke Dashjr In-Reply-To: <201511011906.44081.luke@dashjr.org> References: <201511011906.44081.luke@dashjr.org> Message-ID: <67789addeb5a0e702998f26cc16a8dbd@xbt.hk> X-Sender: jl2012@xbt.hk User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.0.5 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server47.web-hosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.linuxfoundation.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - xbt.hk X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server47.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: jl2012@xbt.hk X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched 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 Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 113: Median time-past is a HARDfork, not a softfork! 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: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 04:27:58 -0000 Currently, a tx maybe included in a block only if its locktime (x) is smaller than the timestamp of a block (y) BIP113 says that a tx maybe included in a block only if x is smaller than the median-time-past (z) It is already a consensus rule that y > z. Therefore, if x < z, x < y The new rule is absolutely stricter than the old rule, so it is a softfork. Anything wrong with my interpretation? Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-11-01 14:06 寫到: > BIP 113 makes things valid which currently are not (any transaction > with a > locktime between the median time past, and the block nTime). Therefore > it is a > hardfork. Yet the current BIP describes and deploys it as a softfork. > > Furthermore, Bitcoin Core one week ago merged #6566 adding BIP 113 > logic to > the mempool and block creation. This will probably produce invalid > blocks > (which CNB's safety TestBlockValidity call should catch), and should be > reverted until an appropriate solution is determined. > > Rusty suggested something like adding N hours to the median time past > for > comparison, and to be a proper hardfork, this must be max()'d with the > block > nTime. On the other hand, if we will have a hardfork in the next year > or so, > it may be best to just hold off and deploy as part of that. > > Further thoughts/input? > > Luke > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev