On May 27, 2015 5:47 AM, "Luke Dashjr" <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:

On Wednesday, May 27, 2015 1:48:05 AM Pieter Wuille wrote:
> Feel free to comment. As the gist does not support notifying participants
> of new comments, I would suggest using the mailing list instead.

I suggest adding a section describing how this interacts with and changes GBT.

Currently, the client tells the server what the highest block version it
supports is, and the server indicates a block version to use in its template,
as well as optional instructions for the client to forcefully use this version
despite its own maximum version number. Making the version a bitfield
contradicts the increment-only assumption of this design, and since GBT
clients are not aware of overall network consensus state, reused bits can
easily become confused. I suggest, therefore, that GBT clients should indicate
(instead of a maximum supported version number) a list of softforks by
identifier keyword, and the GBT server respond with a template indicating:
- An object of softfork keywords to bit values, that the server will accept.
- The version number, as presently conveyed, indicating the preferred softfork
flags.

Does this sound reasonable, and/or am I missing anything else?

Luke

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development