BIP149 timeout-- why so far in the future?
2 messages, 11 Jun 2017. Started by Martijn Meijering.
Martijn Meijering, Jorge Timón
Jorge Timón wrote:
"My preference would be a bip149 proposal that could be merged and released now, but some people complain that would require more testing, because *if you deploy bip149 and then sw gets activated pre nov15, then you want bip149 nodes to use the old service bit for segwit*, not the new one (you would use that one if it activates post nov15, so that pre-bip149 nodes don't get confused)." (emphasis added)
Why not just make sure BIP 149 will never activate unless BIP 141 has expired unsuccessfully? If BIP 141 should unexpectly activate, then BIP 149 nodes would notice and act as pre-SegWit nodes indefinitely, but remain in consensus with BIP 141 nodes.
It might be slightly less convenient for BIP 149 users to upgrade again, but then at least we could start deploying BIP 149 sooner.
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Martijn Meijering via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org> wrote:
Quoted text (3 lines)
> Jorge Timón wrote: > Why not just make sure BIP 149 will never activate unless BIP 141 has > expired unsuccessfully?
Right, that would be part of it, as well as not removing the BIP141 deployment with bip9. See https://github.com/jtimon/bitcoin/commit/62efd741740f5c75c43d78358d6318941e6d3c04
Quoted text (6 lines)
> If BIP 141 should unexpectly activate, then > BIP 149 nodes would notice and act as pre-SegWit nodes indefinitely, > but remain in consensus with BIP 141 nodes. > > It might be slightly less convenient for BIP 149 users to upgrade > again, but then at least we could start deploying BIP 149 sooner.
No, if segwit activates pre nov15, bip149 nodse can detect and interpret that just fine. The problem if it activates post nov15, then you need a separate service bit in the p2p network, for pre-BIP149 will think sw hasn't activated while post-BIP149 would know it has activated.
If you release it only after nov15, you don't need to test compatibility between the two for neither of this two cases. Or do you? Actually you only save testing the easier case of pre-nov15 activation.
Quoted text (4 lines)
> _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev