From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1RAbFB-0001I5-Fx for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 05:39:13 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.216.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.216.47; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-qw0-f47.google.com; Received: from mail-qw0-f47.google.com ([209.85.216.47]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1RAbFA-0004PD-L4 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 05:39:13 +0000 Received: by qadc1 with SMTP id c1so1663011qad.34 for ; Sun, 02 Oct 2011 22:39:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.226.209 with SMTP id ix17mr10799787qcb.147.1317620347199; Sun, 02 Oct 2011 22:39:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.214.144 with HTTP; Sun, 2 Oct 2011 22:39:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201110030132.21646.luke@dashjr.org> References: <201110030132.21646.luke@dashjr.org> Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 01:39:07 -0400 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: Luke-Jr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gmaxwell[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1RAbFA-0004PD-L4 Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Supermajority mining votes for valid->invalid changes. X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 05:39:13 -0000 On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Luke-Jr wrote: > Perhaps as a safeguard: > (3) Before applying the new rule, require 50% of the last Y blocks contai= n a > =C2=A0 =C2=A0coinbase with a "I am upgraded" code > (4) Until the new rule is active, include an "I am upgraded" code in ever= y > =C2=A0 =C2=A0block; after it's active, this can be turned off (4) is a nice idea. I was hoping to avoid (3) simply because for any one of these upgrades hopefully 95% of the network is neutral wrt the change because they won't mine either form of the transactions. The active statement has the benefit that it constitutes a proof: You know with specific confidence (based on the window size) how likely a fork of length X will be if a newly invalid transaction is announced at the time of the activation.