📅 Original date posted:2017-07-13
📝 Original message:On 07/12/2017 06:04 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Dan Libby via bitcoin-dev
> It is not simple to do so correctly, I couldn't tell you off the top
> of my head; a number of things must be changed it isn't as simple as
> disabling the activiation because of the segwit P2P changes. Nor is
> it a supported configuration. Even if it were now, it wouldn't be one
> we'd continue to support in the future after segwit is active, as
> we're likely to drop deployment/compat code.
I understand it is not in any way a supported configuration.
> Can you explain why you wish to do this? It should have absolutely no
> adverse impact on you-- if you don't use segwit, you don't use it-- it
> may be the case that there is some confusion about the implications
> that I could clear up for you... or suggest alternatives that might
> achieve your goals.
Please lets not go into the weeds debating about my reasons.
I actually have nothing against segwit per-se, and think it is clever
tech. I wish that it, or another malleability fix, had been baked in
from the start. But it wasn't, and I dislike changing the consensus
rules except if critical flaws are found.
anyway, some of my reasons are:
I am content with status-quo consensus rules.
I see greatest long-term value in a fixed, unchanging set of rules
(though that is outside my control of course).
I have limited bandwidth and resources and prefer 1mb limit for that reason.
Prior to activation, I do not choose to signal for segwit in any way
shape or form.
I realize I could run a pre-segwit node forever, but would like to enjoy
more recent features and otherwise avoid bit-rot.
I am mule-headed and stubborn. If network-wide activation should
happen, I will most likely upgrade to segwit at some point, but I intend
that point to be at my choosing, not because software defaults did it
for me.
I view it as a little bit of a personal challenge and experiment.
> Effectively the only reason I'm aware of to intentionally not run with
> segwit support beyond just not having upgraded yet, is a desire to try
> to temporarily have as your tip block a block that was actively
> stealing the segwit transactions of a third party. Which doesn't seem
> either personally or publicly desirable; but I fully admit I may be
> missing some good reason which I am not aware of.
no that thought did not enter my mind. still not sure I fully grok it
in fact, but no matter.
--
Dan Libby
Open Source Consulting S.A.
Santa Ana, Costa Rica
http://osc.co.cr
phone: 011 506 2204 7018
Fax: 011 506 2223 7359
Dan Libby [ARCHIVE] /
npub1hm…jk43d
2023-06-07 18:04:28
in reply to nevent1q…ts8t
Author Public Key
npub1hm38d5dwxdq5zxlnv2qdfk3flecptqwl7g7u62ja0tr92d0hmrusejk43dPublished at
2023-06-07 18:04:28Event JSON
{
"id": "92346f29a458a8be79b4b58c39203a1bcce91a893d3942097a77c365de0ceac4",
"pubkey": "bee276d1ae3341411bf36280d4da29fe701581dff23dcd2a5d7ac65535f7d8f9",
"created_at": 1686161068,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"c3417a9d5ad76947acf26c6783addd471ca3bcc5d3ed57deae65203b0eaf5238",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"ca5e383d1949a0689d1c4d41b474b21baa0d69c1d7dc4f5012ec82f8d87fc96c",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"2dae58c027d374a9ac9ad1529dad7f069996a4b442b390d1b7a56b186aa6a0c2"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-07-13\n📝 Original message:On 07/12/2017 06:04 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:\n\u003e On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Dan Libby via bitcoin-dev\n\n\u003e It is not simple to do so correctly, I couldn't tell you off the top\n\u003e of my head; a number of things must be changed it isn't as simple as\n\u003e disabling the activiation because of the segwit P2P changes. Nor is\n\u003e it a supported configuration. Even if it were now, it wouldn't be one\n\u003e we'd continue to support in the future after segwit is active, as\n\u003e we're likely to drop deployment/compat code.\n\nI understand it is not in any way a supported configuration.\n\n\u003e Can you explain why you wish to do this? It should have absolutely no\n\u003e adverse impact on you-- if you don't use segwit, you don't use it-- it\n\u003e may be the case that there is some confusion about the implications\n\u003e that I could clear up for you... or suggest alternatives that might\n\u003e achieve your goals.\n\nPlease lets not go into the weeds debating about my reasons.\n\nI actually have nothing against segwit per-se, and think it is clever\ntech. I wish that it, or another malleability fix, had been baked in\nfrom the start. But it wasn't, and I dislike changing the consensus\nrules except if critical flaws are found.\n\n\nanyway, some of my reasons are:\n\nI am content with status-quo consensus rules.\n\nI see greatest long-term value in a fixed, unchanging set of rules\n(though that is outside my control of course).\n\nI have limited bandwidth and resources and prefer 1mb limit for that reason.\n\nPrior to activation, I do not choose to signal for segwit in any way\nshape or form.\n\nI realize I could run a pre-segwit node forever, but would like to enjoy\nmore recent features and otherwise avoid bit-rot.\n\nI am mule-headed and stubborn. If network-wide activation should\nhappen, I will most likely upgrade to segwit at some point, but I intend\nthat point to be at my choosing, not because software defaults did it\nfor me.\n\nI view it as a little bit of a personal challenge and experiment.\n\n\u003e Effectively the only reason I'm aware of to intentionally not run with\n\u003e segwit support beyond just not having upgraded yet, is a desire to try\n\u003e to temporarily have as your tip block a block that was actively\n\u003e stealing the segwit transactions of a third party. Which doesn't seem\n\u003e either personally or publicly desirable; but I fully admit I may be\n\u003e missing some good reason which I am not aware of.\n\nno that thought did not enter my mind. still not sure I fully grok it\nin fact, but no matter.\n\n\n\n-- \nDan Libby\n\nOpen Source Consulting S.A.\nSanta Ana, Costa Rica\nhttp://osc.co.cr\nphone: 011 506 2204 7018\nFax: 011 506 2223 7359",
"sig": "565b0841e084fbb02af984599ca114a8d0e06b6290f0eb73a34cda4580ffce7345c8b3c3855a8c15f33afb51824b869834f11b1473015cd96014584ee791775d"
}