Your proposal seems to be simply BIP 91 tied to the as-yet-entirely-undefined hard fork Barry et al proposed.
Using James' BIP 91 instead of the Barry-bit-4/5/whatever proposal, as you propose, would make the deployment on the incredibly short timeline Barry et al proposed slightly more realistic, though I would expect to see hard fork code readily available and well-tested at this point in order to meet that timeline. Ultimately, due to their aggressive timeline, the Barry et al proposal is incredibly unlikely to meet the requirements of a multi-billion-dollar system, and continued research into meeting the spirit, not the text, of their agreement seems warranted. Matt On 05/26/17 17:47, Jacob Eliosoff via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Forgive me if this is a dumb question. Suppose that rather than > directly activating segwit, the Silbert/NYC Segwit2MB proposal's lock-in > just triggered BIP141 signaling (plus later HF). Would that avoid > incompatibility with existing BIP141 nodes, and get segwit activated > sooner? Eg: > > - Bit 4 (or bit 5 or whatever, now that BIP91 uses 4) signals support > for "segwit now, HF (TBD) at scheduled date (Nov 23?)" > - If bit 4 support reaches 80%, it locks in two things: the scheduled HF > (conditional on segwit), and *immediately* turning on bit 1 (BIP141 support) > > I realize this would still leave problems like the aggressive HF > schedule, possible chain split at the HF date between Segwit2MB nodes > and any remaining BIP141 nodes, etc. My focus here is how > incompatibility with existing nodes could be minimized. > > (BIP91 could also be used if BIP141 support still fell short of 95%. > But if Segwit2MB support reaches 80%, it seems likely that an additional > 15% will support BIP141-without-HF.) > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
