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 1F487722 for ; Tue, 30 May 2017 13:28:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-vk0-f54.google.com (mail-vk0-f54.google.com [209.85.213.54]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CD9517B for ; Tue, 30 May 2017 13:28:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vk0-f54.google.com with SMTP id x71so44920119vkd.0 for ; Tue, 30 May 2017 06:28:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jtimon-cc.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=6ycjnVOpMf1am2xEVm9/DHaxYzxcB6kCBiIgOx35hKw=; b=GLE8j4j1iN3J/cvOVX1ScPYi6DxZCOOhx67KF7ssnA//b4EQSmRyhuSE7lupNFb8EE A0T8Y+jImGOVi2ie6z06B513iFjHgzalFCh4mMwCoxt+v0OfbmH3obUXtsWAmaxzETMS 2sXkNHYyYWTYA2W/XQrRF9MpoBDR7GO1F7MYdoP4s/y3fcHGP9CdLwNp/dQufkeVrh28 q7ww4I91x4wplRGVvBP1y+ReByttnISnYtQMvDHuGTxi/lJvy2mer+yBft8Yt9iekW7e SfMvokG4TJXXwEcMx5y2iKq04D7XwgTJA+9qycbyLutkTvWPgELAeLcjNJhAzEWNHE/K PAWQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6ycjnVOpMf1am2xEVm9/DHaxYzxcB6kCBiIgOx35hKw=; b=hylD3Ey7G2tMpehdRDyuPRnbX8enHHZSfKTd2SQkv0bBEXokJI2CV/Ofc++MBchJEa 0/govQM6m/kT5RnlybPS3+rGeW6lKTsxGzVnEgH0Jneo8IzX8WOHsb8CoIx0dzHSOMlA Jfs+Vo45VxUGI9tDnIacSbYRvqmg0npop+qKNMZTQQvC5S5JT1mzedqtRo4UWRObTTFT fh3hHNarmgjBEFrJzmeQW4yMRotPEq4nBwK/xF56KPxrIQKJ4FheETXpDJd3f6K0vuJa y2GKH6ZxyDrFHWJoq+8rQgiDjpFZSuZexu/rGiG3C0PfEq8oLe0PddY7KkIv9ZQwnwc8 aJAw== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcD01NrcPeZ+SaJmUDj4KX9aDjPX2FSyaVv8bTgBDD3rqqSbyss+ A/gudXRupLfMryydSFykt/xawCJ6mrSQ X-Received: by 10.31.191.21 with SMTP id p21mr9339193vkf.7.1496150879338; Tue, 30 May 2017 06:27:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.31.52.213 with HTTP; Tue, 30 May 2017 06:27:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <201705232023.40588.luke@dashjr.org> From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 15:27:58 +0200 Message-ID: To: Erik Aronesty Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Hypothetical 2 MB hardfork to follow BIP148 X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 13:28:01 -0000 Why not simply remove the (redundant after sw activation) 1 mb size limit check and increasing the weight limit without changing the discount or having 2 limits? On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 1:07 AM, Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Personally, I would prefer if a 2MB lock-in that uses BIP103 for the timing. > > I think up to 20% per year can be absorbed by averages in bandwidth/CPU/RAM > growth, of which bandwidth seems the most constraining. > > - Erik > > > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev > wrote: >> >> In light of some recent discussions, I wrote up this BIP for a real 2 MB >> block >> size hardfork following Segwit BIP148 activation. This is not part of any >> agreement I am party to, nor anything of that sort. Just something to >> throw >> out there as a possible (and realistic) option. >> >> Note that I cannot recommend this to be adopted, since frankly 1 MB blocks >> really are still too large, and this blunt-style hardfork quite risky even >> with consensus. But if the community wishes to adopt (by unanimous >> consensus) >> a 2 MB block size hardfork, this is probably the best way to do it right >> now. >> The only possible way to improve on this IMO would be to integrate it into >> MMHF/"spoonnet" style hardfork (and/or add other unrelated-to-block-size >> HF >> improvements). >> >> I have left Author blank, as I do not intend to personally champion this. >> Before it may be assigned a BIP number, someone else will need to step up >> to >> take on that role. Motivation and Rationale are blank because I do not >> personally think there is any legitimate rationale for such a hardfork at >> this >> time; if someone adopts this BIP, they should complete these sections. (I >> can >> push a git branch with the BIP text if someone wants to fork it.) >> >> 
>> BIP: ?
>> Layer: Consensus (hard fork)
>> Title: Post-segwit 2 MB block size hardfork
>> Author: FIXME
>> Comments-Summary: No comments yet.
>> Comments-URI: ?
>> Status: Draft
>> Type: Standards Track
>> Created: 2017-05-22
>> License: BSD-2-Clause
>>
>> >> ==Abstract== >> >> Legacy Bitcoin transactions are given the witness discount, and a block >> size >> limit of 2 MB is imposed. >> >> ==Copyright== >> >> This BIP is licensed under the BSD 2-clause license. >> >> ==Specification== >> >> Upon activation, a block size limit of 2000000 bytes is enforced. >> The block weight limit remains at 4000000 WU. >> >> The calculation of block weight is modified: >> all witness data, including both scriptSig (used by pre-segwit inputs) and >> segwit witness data, is measured as 1 weight-unit (WU), while all other >> data >> in the block is measured as 4 WU. >> >> The witness commitment in the generation transaction is no longer >> required, >> and instead the txid merkle root in the block header is replaced with a >> hash >> of: >> >> 1. The witness reserved value. >> 2. The witness merkle root hash. >> 3. The transaction ID merkle root hash. >> >> The maximum size of a transaction stripped of witness data is limited to 1 >> MB. >> >> ===Deployment=== >> >> This BIP is deployed by flag day, in the block where the median-past time >> surpasses 1543503872 (2018 Nov 29 at 15:04:32 UTC). >> >> It is assumed that when this flag day has been reached, Segwit has been >> activated via BIP141 and/or BIP148. >> >> ==Motivation== >> >> FIXME >> >> ==Rationale== >> >> FIXME >> >> ==Backwards compatibility== >> >> This is a hardfork, and as such not backward compatible. >> It should not be deployed without consent of the entire Bitcoin community. >> Activation is scheduled for 18 months from the creation date of this BIP, >> intended to give 6 months to establish consensus, and 12 months for >> deployment. >> >> ==Reference implementation== >> >> FIXME >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >