public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>,
	Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph.org>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Blockchain verification flag (BIP draft)
Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2015 09:13:16 +1030	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <871tb16diz.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T1vBRMYm6rLuqzvOxD0eABE4saF44JzZjMF3iUU==Nz0Q@mail.gmail.com>

Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
writes:
> Overall, good idea.
>
> Is there a write-up somewhere describing in detail the 'accidental selfish
> mining' problem that this mitigates? I think a link in the BIP to a fuller
> description of the problem and how validation-skipping makes it go away
> would be helpful.
>
> RE: which bit to use:  the draft versionbits BIP and BIP101 use bit 30; to
> avoid confusion, I think it would be better to use bit 0.

Yes, BIP9 need to be adjusted (setting bit 30 means BIP9 counts it as a
vote against all softforks).  BIP101 uses bits 0,1,2 AFAICT, so perhaps
start from the other end and use bit 29?  We can bikeshed that later
though...

> I agree with Jannes Faber, behavior with respect to SPV clients should be
> to only tell them about fully validated headers.

A delicate balance.  If we penalize these blocks too much, it's
disincentive to set the bit.  Fortunately it's easy for SPV clients to
decide for themselves, I think?

Cheers,
Rusty.


  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-06  2:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-04  8:26 [bitcoin-dev] Blockchain verification flag (BIP draft) Gregory Maxwell
2015-12-04 12:44 ` Jannes Faber
2015-12-04 16:46   ` Thomas Kerin
2015-12-04 17:34 ` Gavin Andresen
2015-12-04 22:43   ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2015-12-06  2:47     ` James Hilliard
2015-12-06  6:26       ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-12-06  5:13     ` Gregory Maxwell

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=871tb16diz.fsf@rustcorp.com.au \
    --to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=gavinandresen@gmail.com \
    --cc=greg@xiph.org \
    /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