📅 Original date posted:2015-07-31
📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
I really think there should be a document before a BIP number is assigned.
On 23/07/15 12:10, Jorge Timón via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Discussions about whether to get miner's confirmation on
> uncontroversial hardforks or not, and about whether to use nHeight,
> nMedianTime or just use nTime are spreading all around. Hopefully
> getting a BIP number (even though this is still a draft) will help
> concentrating discussions about deployment of uncontroversial
> hardforks to a single place.
> Greg, can I get a BIP number for this?
>
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Tier Nolan <tier.nolan at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Jorge Timón <jtimon at jtimon.cc> wrote:
>>>
>>> You mean the timewarp fix can be coded as a softfork instead of a
>>> hardfork? How so?
>>
>>
>> The easiest would be a rule requiring that all blocks are within 1 day of
>> the median of the previous 11 blocks. At the moment, you need to be
greater
>> than that value. This would add a condition at the other end.
>>
>> It wouldn't be a total fix, but it would protect against the exploit.
>>
>> A stricter soft fork would be that the two blocks in question have to
have
>> the same timestamp. This would force the off by 1 and the correct
value to
>> give the same result.
>>
>>> If that's the case, do you have a better candidate?
>>
>>
>> I think it is fine, since fixing it "right" does require a hard fork,
>> especially if it is only to show a non controversial hard fork.
>>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
- --
My PGP key can be found here: <https://thomaskerin.io/me.pub.asc>;
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=Yh0o
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Thomas Kerin [ARCHIVE] /
npub1e4…nt5am
2023-06-07 15:43:17
in reply to nevent1q…lcfw
Author Public Key
npub1e4azew50kk9xzvfpqxzlyftkjt6kken0kf9lnncpdj524f9y4cqsfnt5amPublished at
2023-06-07 15:43:17Event JSON
{
"id": "ab80e9bf2746b167f15e4ca1a71dd2dbc34d693855a93ebb79cfb37b04c5ec5a",
"pubkey": "cd7a2cba8fb58a6131210185f2257692f56b666fb24bf9cf016ca8aaa4a4ae01",
"created_at": 1686152597,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"c572b249f818758373645da4a4d4cffe8ccabef79cdef027e0e502d5d2c5daf2",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"4d718d37d555eb8608277b07e1a630d653030d790e513dbe0febb786b4a91aac",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"498a711971f8a0194289aee037a4c481a99e731b5151724064973cc0e0b27c84"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-07-31\n📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\nHash: SHA512\n\nI really think there should be a document before a BIP number is assigned.\n\n\nOn 23/07/15 12:10, Jorge Timón via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e Discussions about whether to get miner's confirmation on\n\u003e uncontroversial hardforks or not, and about whether to use nHeight,\n\u003e nMedianTime or just use nTime are spreading all around. Hopefully\n\u003e getting a BIP number (even though this is still a draft) will help\n\u003e concentrating discussions about deployment of uncontroversial\n\u003e hardforks to a single place.\n\u003e Greg, can I get a BIP number for this?\n\u003e\n\u003e On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Tier Nolan \u003ctier.nolan at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Jorge Timón \u003cjtimon at jtimon.cc\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e You mean the timewarp fix can be coded as a softfork instead of a\n\u003e\u003e\u003e hardfork? How so?\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e The easiest would be a rule requiring that all blocks are within 1 day of\n\u003e\u003e the median of the previous 11 blocks. At the moment, you need to be\ngreater\n\u003e\u003e than that value. This would add a condition at the other end.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e It wouldn't be a total fix, but it would protect against the exploit.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e A stricter soft fork would be that the two blocks in question have to\nhave\n\u003e\u003e the same timestamp. This would force the off by 1 and the correct\nvalue to\n\u003e\u003e give the same result.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e If that's the case, do you have a better candidate?\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e I think it is fine, since fixing it \"right\" does require a hard fork,\n\u003e\u003e especially if it is only to show a non controversial hard fork.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\n- -- \nMy PGP key can be found here: \u003chttps://thomaskerin.io/me.pub.asc\u003e\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\nVersion: GnuPG v2\n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\n3Py8BGrArkIe3CeXaTCV\n=Yh0o\n-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----",
"sig": "5e75704c842637e56e5bde4ff9dbdbcb74bcaea75b85984f0c5e62e5cba6e4df42277ac76eab3b2e6508530aa9cfdce4856a02fe97eea897f8e548a6af172886"
}