From: "Jorge Timón" <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Consensus based block size retargeting algorithm (draft)
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 01:44:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABm2gDrL5L6HYf-6L_dxHtOYwQV1ZFHt9r=iXWvE+osRkOk4nA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADJgMzsn_BAynjwFB93DLP9-xSkH4N+5D_O7CH1ajW1PUy-m0Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 1:36 AM, Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name> wrote:
>> However, this proposal currently fails to answer a very important question:
>>
>> • What is the mechanism for activation of the new consensus rule? It is when a certain percentage of the blocks mined in a 2016-block retargeting period contain valid block-size votes?
>
> I chose not to address hard fork methodology at this stage because I
> wanted to focus on the main algorithm. There are a number of options
> open to us for deployment including a simple fixed activation (which I
> think is feasible because there is a a lot of awareness and the
> industry shows they are willing to rally around a single proposal). If
> there are any strong preferences, I can add a deployment section
> although I think it's less interesting until we forge a clear way
> forward with what blocksize proposal to use.
Can we please not discuss an ideal deployment mechanism in 4+
different proposals and discuss the same deployment mechanism (for all
proposals) in BIP99's thread instead?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-28 23:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-21 22:22 [bitcoin-dev] Consensus based block size retargeting algorithm (draft) Btc Drak
2015-08-21 23:17 ` Paul Sztorc
2015-08-22 0:06 ` Ahmed Zsales
2015-08-28 20:28 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-28 21:15 ` Matt Whitlock
2015-08-28 22:24 ` Gavin
2015-08-28 23:35 ` Chris Pacia
2015-08-28 23:38 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-28 23:42 ` Matt Whitlock
2015-08-28 23:42 ` Chris Pacia
2015-08-29 0:00 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-29 0:29 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-29 10:15 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-29 17:51 ` Eric Lombrozo
2015-08-29 19:13 ` Natanael
2015-08-29 19:03 ` jl2012
2015-08-29 20:41 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-30 17:13 ` jl2012
2015-08-30 18:56 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-31 18:50 ` jl2012
2015-08-28 23:46 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-29 9:15 ` Elliot Olds
2015-08-28 23:38 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-28 23:36 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-28 23:44 ` Jorge Timón [this message]
2015-08-29 9:38 ` jl2012
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='CABm2gDrL5L6HYf-6L_dxHtOYwQV1ZFHt9r=iXWvE+osRkOk4nA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jtimon@jtimon.cc \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=btcdrak@gmail.com \
/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