I have written a height based reference implementation as well as updated the
BIP text in the following proposals
"lockinontimeout" was just an implementation detail to allow BIP8 the BIP9
implementation code. With the change to height based, we can dispense with it
entirely.
So the two changes BIP8 brings is BIP9 modified to use height not time, and
remove the veto failed state.
Code: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/master...shaolinfry:bip8-height
BIP: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/compare/master...shaolinfry:bip8-height
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Height based vs block time based thresholds
> Some people have criticized BIP9's blocktime based thresholds arguing they
> are confusing (the first retarget after threshold). It is also vulnerable to
> miners fiddling with timestamps in a way that could prevent or delay
> activation - for example by only advancing the block timestamp by 1 second
> you would never meet the threshold (although this would come a the penalty of
> hiking the difficulty dramatically).
> On the other hand, the exact date of a height based thresholds is hard to
> predict a long time in advance due to difficulty fluctuations. However, there
> is certainty at a given block height and it's easy to monitor.
> If there is sufficient interest, I would be happy to amend BIP8 to be height
> based. I originally omitted height based thresholds in the interests of
> simplicity of review - but now that the proposal has been widely reviewed it
> would be a trivial amendment.
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
