[bitcoin-dev] Draft BIP : fixed-schedule block size increase

Tier Nolan tier.nolan at gmail.com
Mon Jun 22 21:48:01 UTC 2015


On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen at gmail.com>
wrote:

> That complicates the implementation quite a bit.
>

I think trying to keep the number of rules that require context to a
minimum is a good idea.  As pointed out in the BIP, using only the
timestamp of the block means that the block limit can be determined purely
from the block header.

I don't think there is much issue with having a 1MB block following an 8MB
block during the activation.

This is inherent in using the timestamps.  It occurs for every block that
has a timestamp lower than its parent, but to a lesser degree.

When fees are the main source of income, it does create a slight incentive
to use higher timestamps, but that is probably not massive, since it is 2
hours out of the 2 year doubling time.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150622/63c8f1df/attachment.html>


More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list