<div dir="ltr">Overall, good idea.<div><br></div><div>Is there a write-up somewhere describing in detail the 'accidental selfish mining' problem that this mitigates? I think a link in the BIP to a fuller description of the problem and how validation-skipping makes it go away would be helpful.</div><div><br></div><div>RE: which bit to use: the draft versionbits BIP and BIP101 use bit 30; to avoid confusion, I think it would be better to use bit 0.</div><div><br></div><div>I agree with Jannes Faber, behavior with respect to SPV clients should be to only tell them about fully validated headers. And I also agree that immediately relaying full-proof-of-work blocks before validation (with an indication that they haven't been fully validated) is a good idea, but that discussion didn't reach consensus when I brought it up two years ago (<a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/3580">https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/3580</a>).</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">-- <br><div class="gmail_signature">--<br>Gavin Andresen<br></div>
</div></div>