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 691EBDD6 for ; Sun, 7 Feb 2016 14:16:05 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-lb0-f176.google.com (mail-lb0-f176.google.com [209.85.217.176]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81EE52F for ; Sun, 7 Feb 2016 14:16:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lb0-f176.google.com with SMTP id bc4so71160697lbc.2 for ; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 06:16:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=cmtS2NSFbdY3ZkKx0jZrPwNF8UItK4RuzeOp+LQR9ds=; b=FCUxcV2jlF8wr6SOxoCFzsFTDZ4yPR9eQojePu3ouhVJ5ZUoeDpIovWUIgjj7K5hYq nybkjz2YoAQ/6Ae7RClOBlwhtJm2u0KTKSXEzJH3Xou79L6aCNM5r+91dk30wK6lbfue EFu52qs+cm7OtC1kk5fKx8IHbwY8twqxjqiLXr5FvSAdacziayXnAsJVmwAyx0zyoyg9 15hvju/s7t2YhrkGraHsZsQwP5AwXJrKIXGoBKSxsxZh4AiDpTF4tA303Rm4PBfFlvcs ynbQ1kNDym16PdYWHItd3kWBQqETCnhSbo/r3L4qO/AJntBEr8BeN3qHr8FRJYkSU5mX qGBg== 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; bh=cmtS2NSFbdY3ZkKx0jZrPwNF8UItK4RuzeOp+LQR9ds=; b=OfEc0uVq+Zg87AwlqVD7zf4mEcLrA2LDtLSvmW4iqaJc3+W5X+cCVu3GJv7ZgmjW2z dfTrWWxa6O+T7+TGDSp1alT8q1fuWHhf4nP+WvSC6/rAwE6hJ6zjalqFxmIngT242MKu EAqmtwbf5+lv0N53lgAstKKfBHUo2w6B4nhcBcYqNK9jQ9C9h0/mPPh0XAHEt1gZwT0C 9VyTOhermjj/1gzXROqszkuyz3ZMwwgCLN8bkbHTbp3XE40D1HuZe+8Rf4mrpHTAZh6y Z2wgpgAX2NkJ8c2QbV479UQFIwQYZyYwmmbaJfS/DD8Vgcxuy+650W6CVBYU8iWxMBD8 CNDQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOSmQrEkpslGSg8hEjiEp9c9nOmg+fiW1oxLt6qLNsHjRKv16JKl3quSn6+l+VuhslLbHa+2J6VAWuclDQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.171.134 with SMTP id au6mr5079010lbc.27.1454854562740; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 06:16:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.25.206.68 with HTTP; Sun, 7 Feb 2016 06:16:02 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <201602062046.40193.luke@dashjr.org> References: <1804222.7gVHPiWqto@kiwi> <201602062046.40193.luke@dashjr.org> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2016 09:16:02 -0500 Message-ID: From: Gavin Andresen To: Luke Dashjr Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c376dc69863f052b2eb9ad X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,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 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 07 Feb 2016 14:43:02 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Increase block size limit to 2 megabytes 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: Sun, 07 Feb 2016 14:16:05 -0000 --001a11c376dc69863f052b2eb9ad Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Saturday, February 06, 2016 5:25:21 PM Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev wrot= e: > > On Saturday, February 06, 2016 06:09:21 PM Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin= -dev > wrote: > > > None of the reasons you list say anything about the fact that "being > > > lost" (kicked out of the network) is a problem for those node's users= . > > > > That's because its not. > > > > If you have a node that is "old" your node will stop getting new blocks= . > > The node will essentially just say "x-hours behind" with "x" getting > larger > > every hour. Funds don't get confirmed. etc. > > Until someone decides to attack you. Then you'll get 6, 10, maybe more > blocks > confirming a large 10000 BTC payment. If you're just a normal end user (o= r > perhaps an automated system), you'll figure that payment is good and > irreversibly hand over the title to the house. > There will be approximately zero percentage of hash power left on the weaker branch of the fork, based on past soft-fork adoption by miners (they upgrade VERY quickly from 75% to over 95%). So it will take a week to get 6 confirmations. If you are a full node, you are warned that your software is obsolete and you must upgrade. If you are a lightweight node, it SHOULD tell you something is wrong, but even if it doesn't, given that people running lightweight nodes run them so they don't have to be connected to the network 24/7, it is very likely during that week you disconnect and reconnect to the network several times. And every time you do that you increase your chances that you will connect to full nodes on the majority branch of the chain, where you will be told about the double-spend. All of that is assuming that there is no OTHER mitigation done. DNS seeds should avoid reporting nodes that look like they are in the middle of initial block download (that are at a block height significantly behind the rest of the network), for example. --=20 -- Gavin Andresen --001a11c376dc69863f052b2eb9ad Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On S= at, Feb 6, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev &= lt;bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
On Saturday, February 06, 2016 5:25:= 21 PM Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> On Saturday, February 06, 2016 06:09:21 PM Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoi= n-dev
wrote:
> > None of the reasons you list say anything about the fact that &qu= ot;being
> > lost" (kicked out of the network) is a problem for those nod= e's users.
>
> That's because its not.
>
> If you have a node that is "old" your node will stop getting= new blocks.
> The node will essentially just say "x-hours behind" with &qu= ot;x" getting larger
> every hour. Funds don't get confirmed. etc.

Until someone decides to attack you. Then you'll get 6, 10, mayb= e more blocks
confirming a large 10000 BTC payment. If you're just a normal end user = (or
perhaps an automated system), you'll figure that payment is good and irreversibly hand over the title to the house.

There will be approximately zero percentage of hash power left on t= he weaker branch of the fork, based on past soft-fork adoption by miners (t= hey upgrade VERY quickly from 75% to over 95%).

So= it will take a week to get 6 confirmations.

If yo= u are a full node, you are warned that your software is obsolete and you mu= st upgrade.

If you are a lightweight node, it SHOU= LD tell you something is wrong, but even if it doesn't, given that peop= le running lightweight nodes run them so they don't have to be connecte= d to the network 24/7, it is very likely during that week you disconnect an= d reconnect to the network several times. And every time you do that you in= crease your chances that you will connect to full nodes on the majority bra= nch of the chain, where you will be told about the double-spend.
=
All of that is assuming that there is no OTHER mitigation do= ne. DNS seeds should avoid reporting nodes that look like they are in the m= iddle of initial block download (that are at a block height significantly b= ehind the rest of the network), for example.

-- <= br>
--
Gavin Andresen

--001a11c376dc69863f052b2eb9ad--