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 017D3720 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 14:18:30 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 00:08:10 by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from thomaskerin.io (static.204.212.9.5.clients.your-server.de [5.9.212.204]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C958418B for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 14:18:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.4.86.222] (unknown [82.201.92.138]) by thomaskerin.io (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C5E561198101E; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 14:10:12 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2017 16:09:59 +0200 User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: <2796215.bJP4rN4KYZ@strawberry> References: <201704041801.51655.luke@dashjr.org> <2796215.bJP4rN4KYZ@strawberry> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----X4OLUD5KXQROMDEC268T2R8M7CLKV3" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Tom Zander , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion From: Thomas Kerin Message-ID: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Generalized version bits voting (bip-genvbvoting) 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: Wed, 05 Apr 2017 14:18:30 -0000 ------X4OLUD5KXQROMDEC268T2R8M7CLKV3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A schism is just that: miners can't ameliorate a HF transition in the way t= hey can censor transactions without permission=2E This is how miners became= a convenient way to activate soft-forks=2E=20 So while BIP9 can indicate the later censorship (a soft fork) in a way tha= t nodes can follow (or not) a hardfork always requires nodes to upgrade to = the version increasing the degrees of freedom of the system=2E=20 Signaling is less useful here: the change is not opt-in and will require c= oordination; and the continuation of the chain thereafter depends on people= actually running the hard-fork code, not just being aware there is somethi= ng happening=2E On 04/05/2017 12:08 PM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev wrote: On Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:01:51 CEST Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote:= =20 BIP 9 provides a mechanism for having miners coordinate softforks because = they can make the upgrade process smoother this way=2E But the same is not = true of hardforks: miners are essentially irrelevant to them, and cannot ma= ke the process any smoother=2E=20 Can you explain how miners are irrelevant if the upgrade is not a soft for= k?=20 --=20 Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail=2E Please excuse my brevity=2E ------X4OLUD5KXQROMDEC268T2R8M7CLKV3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A schism is just that: miners can't ameliorate a HF transition in the w= ay they can censor transactions without permission=2E This is how miners be= came a convenient way to activate soft-forks=2E

So while BIP9 can indicate the later censorship (a soft fork) in a way tha= t nodes can follow (or not) a hardfork always requires nodes to upgrade to = the version increasing the degrees of freedom of the system=2E

Signaling is less useful here: the change is not opt-in and will require c= oordination; and the continuation of the chain thereafter depends on people= actually running the hard-fork code, not just being aware there is somethi= ng happening=2E


On 04/05/2017 12:08 PM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev wrote:

On Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:01:51 CEST Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote: =

BIP 9 provides a mechanism for having miners coordinate softforks because = they can make the upgrade process smoother this way=2E But the same is not = true of hardforks: miners are essentially irrelevant to them, and cannot ma= ke the process any smoother=2E

Can you explain how miners are irrelevant if the upgrade is not a soft for= k?



--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail=2E Please excuse my brevity=2E ------X4OLUD5KXQROMDEC268T2R8M7CLKV3--