public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jorge Timón" <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: shaolinfry <shaolinfry@protonmail.ch>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Height based vs block time based thresholds
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:51:16 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABm2gDqBE-sxB3j6WK9kW8Zp9GkEG1b3q=_iqJS+XkGzv7EXDQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <q2ezd-tOTBF_3zLOedB36jYCuszrKYS-9BHS_Unle1NipWFTWX-aDwsfy5XrAB2D02SwojA4C_vDIyZa-VEh9IlQalF27HYG5C5KAP9096o=@protonmail.ch>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1951 bytes --]

What if you want height based but lockinontimeout = false ?

On 7 Jul 2017 8:09 am, "shaolinfry via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> I have written a height based reference implementation as well as updated
> the BIP text in the following proposals
>
> "lockinontimeout" was just an implementation detail to allow BIP8 the BIP9
> implementation code. With the change to height based, we can dispense with
> it entirely.
>
> So the two changes BIP8 brings is BIP9 modified to use height not time,
> and remove the veto failed state.
>
> Code: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/master...shaolinfry:bip8-
> height
> BIP: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/compare/master...
> shaolinfry:bip8-height
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Height based vs block time based thresholds
>
> Some people have criticized BIP9's blocktime based thresholds arguing they
> are confusing (the first retarget after threshold). It is also vulnerable
> to miners fiddling with timestamps in a way that could prevent or delay
> activation - for example by only advancing the block timestamp by 1 second
> you would never meet the threshold (although this would come a the penalty
> of hiking the difficulty dramatically).
>
> On the other hand, the exact date of a height based thresholds is hard to
> predict a long time in advance due to difficulty fluctuations. However,
> there is certainty at a given block height and it's easy to monitor.
>
> If there is sufficient interest, I would be happy to amend BIP8 to be
> height based. I originally omitted height based thresholds in the interests
> of simplicity of review - but now that the proposal has been widely
> reviewed it would be a trivial amendment.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3286 bytes --]

      reply	other threads:[~2017-07-07  9:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-05  1:30 [bitcoin-dev] Height based vs block time based thresholds shaolinfry
2017-07-05  2:25 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2017-07-05  3:39 ` Bram Cohen
2017-07-05  3:50 ` Luke Dashjr
2017-07-05  4:00   ` shaolinfry
2017-07-05  4:10     ` Luke Dashjr
2017-07-05 19:44       ` Hampus Sjöberg
2017-07-06 17:20         ` Jorge Timón
2017-07-06 17:41           ` Eric Voskuil
2017-07-05  8:06   ` Gregory Maxwell
2017-07-05  8:54     ` Kekcoin
2017-07-06 20:43     ` Luke Dashjr
2017-07-07  5:52 ` shaolinfry
2017-07-07  9:51   ` Jorge Timón [this message]

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='CABm2gDqBE-sxB3j6WK9kW8Zp9GkEG1b3q=_iqJS+XkGzv7EXDQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=jtimon@jtimon.cc \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=shaolinfry@protonmail.ch \
    /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