[bitcoin-dev] Increasing the blocksize as a (generalized) softfork.
joe2015 at openmailbox.org
joe2015 at openmailbox.org
Mon Dec 21 04:41:54 UTC 2015
On 2015-12-21 12:23, jl2012 wrote:
> I proposed something very similar 2 years ago:
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=283746.0
Yes there are similarities but also some important differences. See my
response here:
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-December/012085.html
In short my proposal is compatible with conventional blocksize limit
hardfork ideas, like BIP101, BIP202, 2-4-8 etc. etc.
> This is an interesting academic idea. But the way you implement it
> will immediately kill all existing full and SPV nodes (not really
> dead, rather like zombie as they can't send and receive any tx).
That's the whole point. After a conventional hardfork everyone needs to
upgrade, but there is no way to force users to upgrade. A user who is
simply unaware of the fork, or disagrees with the fork, uses the old
client and the currency splits.
Under this proposal old clients effectively enter "zombie" mode, forcing
users to upgrade.
--joe
More information about the bitcoin-dev
mailing list