<div dir="auto">+1 to all of Peter Todd's comments</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Nov 6, 2017 11:50 AM, "Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev" <<a href="mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 05:48:27AM +0000, Devrandom via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br>
<br>
Some quick thoughts...<br>
<br>
> Hi all,<br>
><br>
> Feedback is welcome on the draft below. In particular, I want to see if<br>
> there is interest in further development of the idea and also interested in<br>
> any attack vectors or undesirable dynamics.<br>
><br>
> (Formatted version available here:<br>
> <a href="https://github.com/devrandom/btc-papers/blob/master/aux-pow.md" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/devrandom/<wbr>btc-papers/blob/master/aux-<wbr>pow.md</a> )<br>
><br>
> # Soft-fork Introduction of a New POW<br>
<br>
First of all, I don't think you can really call this a soft-fork; I'd call it a<br>
"pseudo-soft-fork"<br>
<br>
My reasoning being that after implementation, a chain with less total work than<br>
the main chain - but more total SHA256^2 work than the main chain - might be<br>
followed by non-supporting clients. It's got some properties of a soft-fork,<br>
but it's security model is definitely different.<br>
<br>
> ### Aux POW intermediate block<br>
><br>
> Auxiliary POW blocks are introduced between normal blocks - i.e. the chain<br>
> alternates between the two POWs.<br>
> Each aux-POW block points to the previous normal block and contains<br>
> transactions just like a normal block.<br>
> Each normal block points to the previous aux-POW block and must contain all<br>
> transactions from the aux-POW block.<br>
<br>
Note how you're basically proposing for the block interval to be decreased,<br>
which has security implications due to increased orphan rates.<br>
<br>
> ### Heaviest chain rule change<br>
><br>
> This is a semi-hard change, because non-upgraded nodes can get on the wrong<br>
> chain in case of attack. However,<br>
<br>
Exactly! Not really a soft-fork.<br>
<br>
--<br>
<a href="https://petertodd.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://petertodd.org</a> 'peter'[:-1]@<a href="http://petertodd.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">petertodd.org</a><br>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div></div>