BIP User Activated Soft Fork Split Protection #546

pull jameshilliard wants to merge 1 commits into bitcoin:master from jameshilliard:bip-splitprotection changing 1 files +105 −0

jameshilliard commented at 9:28 PM on June 7, 2017: contributor

Mailing list discussion: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-June/014508.html
BIP User Activated Soft Fork Split Protection cdda2d3f24
kek-coin commented at 10:32 PM on June 7, 2017: none

The SPLITPROTECTION part of the reference implementation does not seem to match the described behaviour; is this still "todo"?
jameshilliard commented at 10:38 PM on June 7, 2017: contributor

@kek-coin What part specifically does not match?
kek-coin commented at 10:51 PM on June 7, 2017: none

I'm not seeing the 65% or the 504 block-interval anywhere, and it is not clear to me (from the text or the code) if this is supposed to be a rolling window or a quarter of a difficulty retarget. The code seems to refer to a regular BIP9 state machine, and only enforces mandatory signalling during the LOCKED_IN phase; not during the ACTIVE phase, unless I am misreading.
jameshilliard commented at 10:53 PM on June 7, 2017: contributor

This is the interval and this is the percentage.

in bip-splitprotection.mediawiki:50 in cdda2d3f24

  45 | +    LOCK(cs_main);
  46 | +    return (VersionBitsState(pindexPrev, params, Consensus::DEPLOYMENT_SEGWIT, versionbitscache) == THRESHOLD_LOCKED_IN);
  47 | +}
  48 | +
  49 | +// SPLITPROTECTION mandatory segwit signalling.
  50 | +if ( VersionBitsState(pindex->pprev, chainparams.GetConsensus(), Consensus::DEPLOYMENT_SPLITPROTECTION, versionbitscache) == THRESHOLD_LOCKED_IN &&

Vaesper commented at 11:59 PM on June 7, 2017:

Suggest replacing

VersionBitsState(pindex->pprev, chainparams.GetConsensus(), Consensus::DEPLOYMENT_SPLITPROTECTION, versionbitscache) == THRESHOLD_LOCKED_IN &&

with

(VersionBitsState(pindex->pprev, chainparams.GetConsensus(), Consensus::DEPLOYMENT_SPLITPROTECTION, versionbitscache) == THRESHOLD_LOCKED_IN ||
 VersionBitsState(pindex->pprev, chainparams.GetConsensus(), Consensus::DEPLOYMENT_SPLITPROTECTION, versionbitscache) == THRESHOLD_STARTED ) &&

luke-jr commented at 7:53 PM on June 10, 2017: member

This is just a revision to BIP 91. Please update the correct file.
jameshilliard commented at 11:27 PM on June 14, 2017: contributor

@luke-jr this is intended to be separate since it uses BIP8 style activation logic instead of BIP9 as well as a different threshold and version bit
luke-jr commented at 11:53 PM on June 14, 2017: member

Minor implementation details of a young draft. Just change the existing BIP.
jameshilliard commented at 12:02 AM on June 15, 2017: contributor

@luke-jr I disagree that these are minor details, there are different risks associated with the activation methods.
luke-jr commented at 5:23 AM on July 26, 2017: member

@jameshilliard I suggest closing this.
jameshilliard closed this on Jul 26, 2017

Contributors