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 1C9F9956 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 13:15:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-yk0-f182.google.com (mail-yk0-f182.google.com [209.85.160.182]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B57B2131 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 13:15:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ykll84 with SMTP id l84so4247328ykl.0 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 06:15:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=dZ9WQGV8SdB/a6fAaPSKrlCKFjcnZv+eXOLn8WL9cYM=; b=d/2e+iIDaJYvkCxx2bZGfAA0ZagD4KFHIY7xeluhTB4o4GSq+s8JcysI/xMZrP1Jbc PyGnqPdJ3WJtJubj0eSdL8t6DpP7aSqhEwpqwnwrcs/9mr43AeT6utyk4pU5kIC2t+bO GKuPT4QL0INE8Wkd0ShAf3VdcHDCtb+PowmQFtLFpmMq+ZWiUuRN9nIOq9vAWTm9+jUj jtXZ50d186JdoV8FzyOb0dMneNAkHkvCqlXID5ePQfJP7pSiEJpNo9cR2SwpSgPGABgY owXzR3TbT/hHqcgNeLzyq9GiWlaUkTkCjpfZFRDdv+fmVWEaw6rIOfN0d7vqH3V/enjR 825w== X-Received: by 10.13.222.1 with SMTP id h1mr13272898ywe.174.1439990137870; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 06:15:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.37.94.132 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 06:15:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20150819055036.GA19595@muck> From: Btc Drak Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 14:15:18 +0100 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c07c412a5de2f051da9d452 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM, HK_RANDOM_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW 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 , Pieter Wuille Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] CLTV/CSV/etc. deployment considerations due to XT/Not-BitcoinXT miners 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: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 13:15:39 -0000 --94eb2c07c412a5de2f051da9d452 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n wrote= : > I don't think just using version=3D4 for cltv and friends would be a > problem if it wasn't for the XT/nonXT issue. What problem am I missing if we just mask of the offending bits. For my own project which uses auxpow (and thus has weird nVersion), I also used the bitmasking method to get rid of auxpow version bits before making the standard integer comparisons to deploy BIP66 using IsSuperMajority(): if ((block.nVersion & 0xff) >=3D 4 && CBlockIndex::IsSuperMajority(...)= ) { //...} --94eb2c07c412a5de2f051da9d452 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On W= ed, Aug 19, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@jtimon.cc> wrote:
I don't think just using = version=3D4 for cltv and friends would be a
problem if it wasn't for the XT/nonXT issue.

What problem am I missing if we just mask of the offending bits. For = my own project which uses auxpow (and thus has weird nVersion), I also used= the bitmasking method to get rid of auxpow version bits before making the = standard integer comparisons to deploy BIP66 using IsSuperMajority():
=

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 if ((block.nVersion & 0xff) >=3D 4= && CBlockIndex::IsSuperMajority(...)) { //...}
--94eb2c07c412a5de2f051da9d452--