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 DE2DABD4 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 23:20:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-lf0-f43.google.com (mail-lf0-f43.google.com [209.85.215.43]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CFA4140 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 23:20:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf0-f43.google.com with SMTP id j90so351314lfk.2 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 16:20:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to; bh=JuXDSTOr3myNv5Qaf3p7xJAfUdLYD2xeEI0f08YVoUo=; b=XUeC+Eplq1SPmOKRMDa/LIaTmgdGFFONill/Ai6xLiFxEgPaIEvAsbAQFfutroxFEF i/D86z9ysgcWJ5dHkyFcIMGLBO74Oou/yiHWNOu4/ELEBit4OKXIJxqcsm16aE3aP/F6 HYHiblP7gLeTjyecXp+q+smQN6F5p+NKp0IhNS92caXy/ZuXWXGqL2c4AXYEgZ0qCV5R TKfIdTeAq5e6tWqjEAuHu6KQXud8i9SGZHTeU3/fCqPR2wjfvgwlIulJTLn6C9FDnuPA k8zVghntQqsXu975bnPEujtUSvyK2mIi3RkPSNH9NEFC6vWrQI/O814gYrCK1UxGvGNN gvBg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to; bh=JuXDSTOr3myNv5Qaf3p7xJAfUdLYD2xeEI0f08YVoUo=; b=bGTmBI4HPKOqeP1n0XpAht313JJ/K+Z9tRdHE6K2LhlIDOCb1qRnp8u0A56DorU3KY V0I2+4H9/ajisBhZ/VTDvvrT8DZpUeZ7nRWLinFp0UX9ouE/aBTECIDasiBWzGbW+MVn OyzCtYhdlD5L1rx2uRjmjXncMH6TEa0rTI2z72keq+MI4VdA5AcuDRcuq3hrtMSjJ41C OZXXmchbSDBecxB74ZgcLWdYYwjolQic7Wb+bjrf/ZemFfGEvyqT7AFOMjANjgc9J1h0 WqtacFuZUzGFCALDjJz7JII0GAsdYqcjmG9OJz/np8/qfwUbdADvUF13yXKyCJ9xdm93 gORQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H28c8w43IqtV5RFOka2RHZBDFv9g0ZzmRqxVcE8VAuRLJwnEktfPhCBW5YmT16c9erG2Cct/mPEsc1H4w== X-Received: by 10.25.102.10 with SMTP id a10mr42168lfc.159.1489533649250; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 16:20:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: earonesty@gmail.com Received: by 10.25.160.203 with HTTP; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 16:20:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Erik Aronesty Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 19:20:48 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: sCJIEYq_Yti6_3Y4g0M5VNsaHKY Message-ID: To: ashish khandekar , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c1cd1180bfd6a054ab914fc X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE 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: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 22:40:21 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Solution for blockchain congestion and determination of block size by bitcoin network/protocol itself. X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 23:20:52 -0000 --94eb2c1cd1180bfd6a054ab914fc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 - no quadratic hashing solution - no way to prevent spamming the network to blow up block sizes - no mention of release schedule/consensus levels, etc. should be mentioned - this is similar to other BIP already in place... see BIP107 On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 9:08 AM, ashish khandekar via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Should a BIP be submitted or are there any suggestions for the proposal ? > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > --94eb2c1cd1180bfd6a054ab914fc Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
- no quadratic hashing solution
- no w= ay to prevent spamming the network to blow up block sizes
- no men= tion of release schedule/consensus levels, etc.=C2=A0=C2=A0 should be menti= oned
- this is similar to other BIP already in place... see BIP107<= br>

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 9:08 AM, ashish khandekar via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:<= br>
Should a BIP be submitte= d or are there any suggestions for the proposal ?

_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.= linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org= /mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


--94eb2c1cd1180bfd6a054ab914fc--