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 36548F08 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 23:44:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-la0-f42.google.com (mail-la0-f42.google.com [209.85.215.42]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 635CE11E for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 23:44:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by laboe4 with SMTP id oe4so15522293lab.0 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 16:44:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=eTxlqbav9BgVro3Z4IXKAxcLARe5JNP81N0MGibFMTg=; b=RhSbHBXrUibkAAl0C8u8okoktp7xfMyQikk+wlnbkUcXDphikFD7XnzrblqKzSjCEI sRSpzYY9Wrzr/veJv/L+iad+dlSi1mS/iZYzpJnowY9wPL9/vPOwsTyDE/SnqAgph/sl SRAoLVonuZvVNkiuWyaNLxMTwi+bAR9LU5mKw0U9jSJocA7JRg3Xu+kEsFd4iVfDrI9p Kn4Zq/cpC922+PmDesWFstueESrUhL85ULurVlA8Cuk/z1/y1UXKuQhZBUzZtxkukmBM Yf3+Eu+dkKxyC1bYXpebAr6cmkKS178V1moexUFb/nCH/lSMliLUW2dW19jU11EPPsIr UD/A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmLhoe51i3rVvrrsiDAjEF4j++cYeGYQvfX6sqIACUeJofgRlSl2aIxummFq5r4Kfw0hWOP MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.146.106 with SMTP id tb10mr6138410lbb.22.1440805462597; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 16:44:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.25.15.22 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 16:44:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <2081355.cHxjDEpgpW@crushinator> Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 01:44:22 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= To: Btc Drak Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham 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] Consensus based block size retargeting algorithm (draft) X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 23:44:25 -0000 On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 1:36 AM, Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev wrote: > On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Matt Whitlock w= rote: >> However, this proposal currently fails to answer a very important questi= on: >> >> =E2=80=A2 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 retar= geting 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?