Published on: 2017-03-26T11:08:08+00:00
The discussion revolves around the activation of Segregated Witness (SegWit) on the Bitcoin network. Currently, the proposal states that if at least 1916 out of 2016 blocks signal readiness for SegWit, it will be activated in the next retarget cycle. However, some suggest changing this requirement to just one block signaling readiness. Concerns are raised about participants who do not upgrade and may refuse to build on SegWit blocks or even build on invalid ones. One suggestion is to fork and let them learn the hard way.On the Bitcoin-dev mailing list, a proposal is made for mandatory SegWit activation between October 1st and November 15th, 2017. Developer Luke Dashjr points out that the proposal is not BIP9 compatible and suggests not setting the bit after activation. He also suggests adding a condition to not require mandatory signaling during the LOCKED_IN period. A code is presented to check for SegWit signaling in relayed blocks, with a denial-of-service attack triggered if the block does not signal for SegWit. Compatibility with BIP9 is discussed, suggesting checking if the SegWit bit has already locked in before further checks. The code includes a time condition to ensure the activation period has passed.The community discusses activating SegWit without releasing a new deployment. A counter-fork called "Double UASF" is proposed, enforcing UASF rules plus an additional rule. If 60% of blocks signal for Double UASF, any block creating or spending a segregated witness output is invalid. Miners who adopt Double UASF ban all SegWit transactions and don't need to understand SegWit or commit to a specific structure. It is noted that delayed activation of SegWit hinders protocol innovations such as MAST, Covenants, Schnorr signature schemes, and signature aggregation. Activating the existing SegWit deployment without a new one is suggested, similar to how P2SH was activated.A BIP proposal is made for mandatory SegWit activation between October 1st and November 15th, 2017. It is suggested to obtain cooperation agreements from major economic players before setting a flag day. Non-signaling miners would not get paid and their blocks rejected, incentivizing them to signal or find other profitable options. The existing SegWit deployment would be triggered for those who have upgraded. Close to 100% cooperation is desired as these entities hold user's bitcoins and can threaten the success of a UASF. If the UASF triggers with majority support but miners resist, there may be a temporary minority block reward chain. Failure of the UASF means a permanent coin split.The delayed activation of SegWit hinders protocol innovations and existing systems that rely on SegWit. A suggestion is made to release code that rejects non-signaling SegWit blocks, triggering BIP9 activation. A BIP16-like soft fork flag day activation proposal is drafted, aiming to activate SegWit between October 1st and November 15th, 2017 if the existing deployment is not activated earlier. This would avoid a complete new deployment and hash power veto. The community discusses the importance of the ecosystem industry's investment in SegWit adoption and the need for caution in opposing a UASF.Overall, the discussions focus on activating SegWit and addressing concerns regarding compatibility, participation, and the potential for forks. The delayed activation of SegWit is seen as hindering innovation and existing systems, prompting proposals for mandatory activation and alternative approaches like Double UASF. Cooperation from major economic players is deemed crucial for successful activation.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T19:46:03.337823+00:00