I would also like to agree that Signet should be a BIP.
Problem: Testnet is unreliable. *Testnet is used often for development of
Bitcoin*.
Proposal: To improve the dev environment for Bitcoin, let's create a new
kind of testnet that is more reliable.
I would also like to hear the logic behind "T
On 10/12/19 10:56 AM, Joachim Strömbergson via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> [...] First you provide proof of your best block height via coinbase [...]
So I don't think you can use the height in the coinbase for that
purpose, as it's not possible to validate it without the previous
headers. That's common
On 10/12/19 9:27 AM, Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> [...]
>
> I think parallel downloading would be better than focusing on one peer
> initially. Otherwise, a dishonest peer can slowly send their headers to
> prevent moving to parallel mode.
>
> [...]
As implemented, there is a timeout for
Indeed, Signet is no less (or more) Bitcoin than a seed format or BIP 32. It’s
“not Bitcoin” but it’s certainly “interoperability for how to build good
testing for Bitcoin”.
> On Oct 14, 2019, at 19:55, Karl-Johan Alm via bitcoin-dev
> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> The pull request to the bips repo
Hello,
The pull request to the bips repository for Signet has stalled, as the
maintainer isn't sure Signet should have a BIP at all, i.e. "is Signet
Bitcoin?".
My argument is that Signet is indeed Bitcoin and should have a BIP, as
this facilitates the interoperability between different software i
