Currently, a tx maybe included in a block only if its locktime (x) is
smaller than the timestamp of a block (y)
BIP113 says that a tx maybe included in a block only if x is smaller
than the median-time-past (z)
It is already a consensus rule that y > z. Therefore, if x < z, x < y
The new rule is absolutely stricter than the old rule, so it is a
softfork. Anything wrong with my interpretation?
Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-11-01 14:06 寫到:
BIP 113 makes things valid which currently are not (any transaction
with a
locktime between the median time past, and the block nTime). Therefore
it is a
hardfork. Yet the current BIP describes and deploys it as a softfork.
Furthermore, Bitcoin Core one week ago merged #6566 adding BIP 113
logic to
the mempool and block creation. This will probably produce invalid
blocks
(which CNB's safety TestBlockValidity call should catch), and should be
reverted until an appropriate solution is determined.
Rusty suggested something like adding N hours to the median time past
for
comparison, and to be a proper hardfork, this must be max()'d with the
block
nTime. On the other hand, if we will have a hardfork in the next year
or so,
it may be best to just hold off and deploy as part of that.
Further thoughts/input?
Luke
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
