📅 Original date posted:2021-03-03
📝 Original message:On 3/3/21 14:08, Russell O'Connor via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> While I support essentially any proposed taproot activation method, including a flag day activation, I think it is
> premature to call BIP8 dead.
>
> Even today, I still think that starting with BIP8 LOT=false is, generally speaking, considered a reasonably safe
> activation method in the sense that I think it will be widely considered as a "not wholly unacceptable" approach to
> activation.
How do you propose avoiding divergent consensus rules on the network, something which a number of commentors on this
list have publicly committed to?
> After a normal and successful Core update with LOT=false, we will have more data showing broad community support for the
> taproot upgrade in hand.
I think this is one of the strongest arguments against a flag day activation, but, as I described in more detail in the
thread "Straight Flag Day (Height) Taproot Activation", I'm not sure we aren't there enough already.
> In the next release, 6 months later or so, Core could then confidently deploy a BIP8 LOT=true
Could you clarify what an acceptable timeline is, then? Six months from release of new consensus rules to activation (in
the case of a one-year original window) seems incredibly agressive for a flag-day activation, let alone one with
forced-signaling, which would require significantly higher level of adoption to avoid network split risk. In such a
world, we'd probably get Taproot faster with a flag day from day one.
> client, should it prove to be necessary. A second Core deployment of LOT=true would mitigate some of the concerns with
> LOT=false, but still provide a period beforehand to objective actions taken by the community in support of taproot. We
> don't even have to have agreement today on a second deployment of LOT=true after 6 months to start the process of a
> LOT=false deployment. The later deployment will almost certainly be moot, and we will have 6 months to spend debating
> the LOT=true deployment versus doing a flag day activation or something else.
That was precisely the original goal with the LOT=false movement - do something easy and avoid having to hash out all
the technical details of a second deployment. Sadly, that's no longer tennable as a number of people are publicly
committed to deploying LOT=true software on the network ASAP.
Matt
Matt Corallo [ARCHIVE] /
npub1e4…jxmcu
2023-06-07 18:29:57
in reply to nevent1q…qaut
Author Public Key
npub1e46n428mcyfwznl7nlsf6d3s7rhlwm9x3cmkuqzt3emmdpadmkaqqjxmcuPublished at
2023-06-07 18:29:57Event JSON
{
"id": "3bd6ccce25c837607b8d46bb3fc2f8312cfb4c1387cc84443b6075d19232ae93",
"pubkey": "cd753aa8fbc112e14ffe9fe09d3630f0eff76ca68e376e004b8e77b687adddba",
"created_at": 1686162597,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"06f81a4772cfd591a3ba851990b1b3701b74c7460ca0f5e45bb7dfe492b7e3a1",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"993fdd33da3aa446dc03e18a08f4004afdd1c70f88d3f6893f0614807ff24fc0",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"6b8e77368804013d7126ba4b77c7963bcfeff909135791531097d7a0f03ca85d"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2021-03-03\n📝 Original message:On 3/3/21 14:08, Russell O'Connor via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e While I support essentially any proposed taproot activation method, including a flag day activation, I think it is \n\u003e premature to call BIP8 dead.\n\u003e \n\u003e Even today, I still think that starting with BIP8 LOT=false is, generally speaking, considered a reasonably safe \n\u003e activation method in the sense that I think it will be widely considered as a \"not wholly unacceptable\" approach to \n\u003e activation.\n\nHow do you propose avoiding divergent consensus rules on the network, something which a number of commentors on this \nlist have publicly committed to?\n\n\u003e After a normal and successful Core update with LOT=false, we will have more data showing broad community support for the \n\u003e taproot upgrade in hand.\n\nI think this is one of the strongest arguments against a flag day activation, but, as I described in more detail in the \nthread \"Straight Flag Day (Height) Taproot Activation\", I'm not sure we aren't there enough already.\n\n\u003e In the next release, 6 months later or so, Core could then confidently deploy a BIP8 LOT=true \n\nCould you clarify what an acceptable timeline is, then? Six months from release of new consensus rules to activation (in \nthe case of a one-year original window) seems incredibly agressive for a flag-day activation, let alone one with \nforced-signaling, which would require significantly higher level of adoption to avoid network split risk. In such a \nworld, we'd probably get Taproot faster with a flag day from day one.\n\n\u003e client, should it prove to be necessary. A second Core deployment of LOT=true would mitigate some of the concerns with \n\u003e LOT=false, but still provide a period beforehand to objective actions taken by the community in support of taproot. We \n\u003e don't even have to have agreement today on a second deployment of LOT=true after 6 months to start the process of a \n\u003e LOT=false deployment. The later deployment will almost certainly be moot, and we will have 6 months to spend debating \n\u003e the LOT=true deployment versus doing a flag day activation or something else.\n\nThat was precisely the original goal with the LOT=false movement - do something easy and avoid having to hash out all \nthe technical details of a second deployment. Sadly, that's no longer tennable as a number of people are publicly \ncommitted to deploying LOT=true software on the network ASAP.\n\nMatt",
"sig": "047cef52b105bb0b78fb8776d72455e4eabd5e2ec45fd6a7c28cd320feaf7cd95357d78acbd49e77497f58abd3c2f168fcbb34aa02094badb98d34f7bc0a2654"
}