📅 Original date posted:2015-09-17
📝 Original message:Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:19 PM, Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au>
> wrote:
>> You need a timeout: an ancient (non-mining, thus undetectable) node
>> should never fork itself off the network because someone reused a failed
>> BIP bit.
>>
>
> I meant if the 2nd bit was part of the BIP. One of the 2 bits is "FOR" and
> the other is "AGAINST". If against hits 25%, then it is deemed a failure.
>
> The 2nd bit wouldn't be used normally. This means that proposals can be
> killed quickly if they are obviously going to fail.
This could be added if we approach one failed soft fork every 5 weeks,
I guess (or it could be just for specific soft forks).
Cheers,
Rusty.
Rusty Russell [ARCHIVE] /
npub1zw…hkhpx
2023-06-07 17:40:10
in reply to nevent1q…0w9n
Author Public Key
npub1zw7cc8z78v6s3grujfvcv3ckpvg6kr0w7nz9yzvwyglyg0qu5sjsqhkhpxPublished at
2023-06-07 17:40:10Event JSON
{
"id": "46767ade95f46b25ceaf4b9e33637de6720741c0a3aca54b0711d6ab917f4579",
"pubkey": "13bd8c1c5e3b3508a07c92598647160b11ab0deef4c452098e223e443c1ca425",
"created_at": 1686159610,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"97970fd647e1ad99b763fefc14ff6c3da92992c59a8d85f2e5fe9ba87f5c9fb9",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"6e361b8de8a7a6950a33018db2f56dd2240d1d47cf8441d52320e1dae4e8bafc",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"46986f86b97cc97829a031b03209644d134b939d0163375467f0b1363e0d875e"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-09-17\n📝 Original message:Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e writes:\n\u003e On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:19 PM, Rusty Russell \u003crusty at rustcorp.com.au\u003e\n\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e You need a timeout: an ancient (non-mining, thus undetectable) node\n\u003e\u003e should never fork itself off the network because someone reused a failed\n\u003e\u003e BIP bit.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e I meant if the 2nd bit was part of the BIP. One of the 2 bits is \"FOR\" and\n\u003e the other is \"AGAINST\". If against hits 25%, then it is deemed a failure.\n\u003e\n\u003e The 2nd bit wouldn't be used normally. This means that proposals can be\n\u003e killed quickly if they are obviously going to fail.\n\nThis could be added if we approach one failed soft fork every 5 weeks,\nI guess (or it could be just for specific soft forks).\n\nCheers,\nRusty.",
"sig": "cabd312317961d72bbbd6d8ef26573a29fbc5c81aeecdbda963adc2304d9e1feda8c697f4b1088a33dc5fdf19ed6a2910dbbadfe27e684af343149909c04a85b"
}