User Activated Soft Fork Split Protection

Summary:

The conversation between Jared Lee Richardson and James Hilliard revolves around the potential impacts of BIP148, a user activated soft fork (UASF), on the Bitcoin network. Richardson believes that exchanges will likely handle the splitting of transactions for less technical users. He argues that economic support, rather than hashpower, will be the primary factor in determining the success of BIP148 despite the risks associated with chain abandonment. On the other hand, Hilliard acknowledges the potential for wipeout risk on the non-BIP148 side but notes that replay protection is necessary for the minority chain to become profitable.Hilliard also suggests that higher transaction fees can compensate for a lower price and incentivize miners to follow the BIP148 chain. The conversation further touches on the issues with segwit2x's bundling and the need for proper consensus in a hard fork. Ultimately, the success of BIP148 remains uncertain and will depend on various factors.The BIP148 proposal is seen as a risky gamble by some, with the potential to worsen the chances of a chain split. It requires a clear miner majority to activate, and there are concerns about the aggressiveness of the segwit2x timelines and the non-hardfork timelines. If segwit2x changes are rolled out on time, and signatories accept the bit4 + bit1 signaling proposals within BIP91, the launch may go smoothly. However, if timelines for segwit2mb are missed or signatories baulk at Bit1 signaling, it may cause the BIP148 chainsplit to be worse than it would be without the proposal.James Hilliard proposed a new soft fork called "splitprotection" to prevent a potential chain split ahead of the BIP148 activation. The SegWit2x agreement's proposed calendar for activating SegWit mandatory signalling ahead of BIP148 using BIP91 was too slow, and unless immediately deployed, BIP91 would not be able to enforce mandatory signalling before the August 1st activation of BIP148. The splitprotection soft fork essentially uses BIP8 instead of BIP9 with a lower activation threshold and immediate mandatory signalling lock-in but allows for a majority of miners to activate mandatory SegWit signalling and prevent a potential chain split ahead of BIP148 activation.The mandatory signalling requirement for miners ensures that they are aware of new rules being enforced and can be used to lower the signalling threshold of a soft fork during deployment. The BIP8 style timeout is used to ensure compatibility with BIP148 and activate mandatory signalling regardless of miner signalling levels. By orphaning non-signalling blocks during the BIP9 bit 1 "segwit" deployment, the existing "segwit" deployment can activate without the need for a new deployment. As BIP148 activation approaches, it may be desirable for a majority of miners to have a method that will ensure there is no chain split. The document is dual licensed as BSD 3-clause and Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal. References include mailing list discussions, P2SH flag day activation, and various BIPs related to version bits, pay to script hash, reduced threshold segwit MASF, segregated witness, transaction signature verification, dummy stack element malleability, and mandatory activation of segwit deployment. Benefits of segregated witness are also mentioned in a separate reference. Users should either upgrade to splitprotection or wait for additional confirmations when accepting payments while this BIP is active. This BIP also allows miners to signal their intention to run BIP148 to prevent a chain split. Miners will need to upgrade their nodes to support splitprotection; otherwise, they may build on top of an invalid block.

Updated on: 2023-06-12T01:53:59.853132+00:00