Author: ZmnSCPxj 2017-09-10 05:33:06
Published on: 2017-09-10T05:33:06+00:00
The email contains a discussion between Bitcoin developers regarding the unification of drivechains and SPV proofs through sidechain headers on mainchain (SHOM), which uses bits of data included in mainchain headers to define the sidechain's header. While there is agreement among the developers that sidechains need to be merge-mined, the idea of unifying merged-mining and WT^ validity voting is disputed as it may regress SHOM to mere extension blocks and take on many of the negative properties of extension blocks. The power to decide the validity of a sidechain lies in the economic majority rather than the miners, but there are concerns that 51% miner-group can pay bribes to themselves and orphan any block or transaction that disagrees with them. The security guarantee in proof of work and proof of stake is considered more reasonable than in SHOM because there is no reason to believe that the total amount of money available for withdrawal in a given time will always be smaller than the sum of 288 bribes. The email also notes that lockboxes should have fixed value to help maintain obscurity after side-to-main transfers, but this parameter is something to be endlessly debated. Sidechains may first be deployed as federated peg, then at some sidechain height, the federation may announce a move to drivechain/sidechain-headers-on-mainchain. The move from federated to economic-majority-controlled would involve the federation moving its controlled lockboxes to OP_WITHDRAWPROOFVERIFY lockboxes. However, some developers express their lack of faith in the design, believing either the design works or it does not. The mechanism that supports sidechains supports any financial system, including centralized, non-blockchain ones. Finally, the email includes links to more detailed discussions about the topics mentioned.
Updated on: 2023-06-12T18:39:39.922155+00:00