Published on: 2021-04-06T21:31:23+00:00
In an email exchange, Russell O'Connor corrected a mistake made by Dave about Bitcoin's activation scheme. Dave expressed his preference for a predictable activation date and recommended infrastructure adjustments. However, he acknowledged the simplicity of the current height-based activation. On the Bitcoin development mailing list, a discussion took place regarding the MTP lock-in for activation of soft forks. The variable "time_until_next_retargeting_period" was highlighted as one whose distribution could straddle between 0 and 14 days if the MIN_LOCKIN_TIME ends up close to a retargeting boundary. It was noted that the observed time frame of a single retarget period over the last few years on mainnet is 11-17 days.Russell O'Connor argued in an email exchange with David A. Harding that height-based activation provides more accurate estimates consistently and smoothly as activation approaches. In contrast, MTP LOCKIN only guarantees a minimum two-week notice prior to activation. O'Connor emphasized the simplicity and ease of reasoning about height-based activation. In another email from David A. Harding, instructions were provided for upgrading a system using the command "date -d "$MIN_LOCKIN_TIME + 11 days". A correction was made to the ten-minute estimator's command, stating that it should be "$MIN_LOCKIN_TIME + time until next retargeting period + $((10 * 2016)) minutes" instead of just adding 10 times 2016 minutes.The Bitcoin community is discussing the activation of Taproot, with debate around height-based activation versus Median Time Past (MTP) activation. Some community members prefer height-based activation due to its predictability and cleanliness. However, MTP activation can ensure a minimum of seven retargeting periods by carefully selecting signaling start and end dates. Anthony Towns provided data on the number of retarget periods and stats from the last few years of mainnet for different signaling periods. The community must determine if they can reach consensus on either approach.The author presented a table of results obtained from running tests to determine the probability of success for different percentages and numbers of trials. The author concluded that MTP can be used to ensure a smooth upgrade, and provided a link to the code used in the tests. In another email discussion, the number of retarget periods required for successful activation was discussed. The email also provided stats on the number of periods required to reach successful activation over the last few years on mainnet. Questions were raised regarding whether signaling is still possible by the time enough miners have upgraded and are ready to start signaling, and whether nodes have upgraded to enforce new rules when activation occurs. Corresponding numbers for testnet were also provided.In a Bitcoin development meeting, the pros and cons of using height or MTP to determine consensus were discussed. The conversation centered around the number of retarget periods needed for successful activation. A timeline discussion was held in hopes of reaching consensus on parameters mindful of Core's process. One participant suggested continuing the search for the ideal activation method. The meeting also mentioned an update to MTP time by AJ, which is intended to be compatible with a mandatory signaling period and makes it easier to deploy ST on signets. If rough consensus is not reached, the group will discuss scheduling realities.A bitcoin-dev meeting is scheduled to discuss topics related to activation, including the update to MTP time, selecting between MTP and height, and timeline discussion. Participants expressed frustration and the need for consensus. The update to MTP time has been updated and simplified to be compatible with mandatory signaling periods and make it easier to deploy ST on signets. If rough consensus is not reached, there may be a discussion about scheduling realities.
Updated on: 2023-08-02T03:32:05.456893+00:00