[bitcoin-dev] BIP - 'Block75' - New algorithm
luke at dashjr.org
Mon Jan 2 20:04:56 UTC 2017
On Monday, January 02, 2017 6:04:37 PM t. khan via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Thoughts? For any predictions as to how this would behave, please provide
> the numbers used to arrive at any conclusions.
It would probably behave as an ever-increasing block size limit. Spam has
typically filled blocks to the max, and miners have stopped self-enforcing
> 2. Is there any need for a minimum max blocksize? Block75 allows for
> decreasing the size as well as increasing it.
Probably it should never make it so small that a reasonable generation
transaction cannot fit. But I'm not sure this needs explicit enforcement.
> To help negate some of the risk associated with a hard fork and to prevent
> a single relatively small mining pool from blocking Block75's adoption,
> activation would occur once 900 of the last 1,000 blocks mined signaled
> support, with a grace period of 4,032 blocks.
If you can't trust miners to signal based on the community's consensus, then
don't use miner signalling at all. Just set a block height it activates.
> Thank you again to all those who commented on the previous Block75 thread.
> Together, we can make 2017 the year the block size debate ends (hopefully
I doubt you'll get consensus for such a fundamentally broken proposal.
I certainly don't foresee any circumstance where I could reasonably support
it... The block size limit exists to restrict miners; it makes no sense to put
it in their control.
More information about the bitcoin-dev