Author: Mark Friedenbach 2017-04-15 13:42:25
Published on: 2017-04-15T13:42:25+00:00
In this exchange, Mark Friedenbach responds to Greg's argument against BIP148, which requires the segwit BIP9 activation flag to be set in every block after Aug 1st until segwit activates. Greg argues that this will cause miners who have not upgraded and indicated support for BIP141 to find their blocks ignored by UASF nodes. However, Mark points out that this is the entire point of BIP148 and not a technical oversight. He also notes that Greg's alternative proposal (new BIP bit) has the downside of not triggering BIP141 activation and therefore not enabling new consensus rules on already deployed full nodes. Mark argues that BIP148 is making an explicit choice to favor dragging along those users who have upgraded to BIP141 support over those miners who have failed to upgrade. Aside from their differing opinions on BIP148, Mark expresses disappointment that Greg has made a public statement against the UASF proposal, as any UASF must be a grassroots effort and endorsements or denouncements detract from that.
Updated on: 2023-06-12T00:11:32.432749+00:00