P.S.: To be clearer, in this example I set an N value of 144 blocks, which is approximately 24 hours.
________________________________ From: Kenshiro [] <tens...@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 16:40 To: Alistair Mann <a...@pectw.net>; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Add a moving checkpoint to the Bitcoin protocol >>> How would a (potentially, state-sponsored) netsplit lasting longer than N be handled? It would be detected by the community much before reaching the reorg limit of N blocks (it's 24 hours) so nodes could stop until the netsplit is fixed. In the extreme case no one notice the network split during more than N blocks (24 hours) and there are 2 permanent forks longer than N, nodes from one branch could delete their local history so they would join the other branch. Regards, ________________________________ From: Alistair Mann <a...@pectw.net> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 15:59 To: Kenshiro [] <tens...@hotmail.com>; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Add a moving checkpoint to the Bitcoin protocol On Wednesday 31 Jul 2019 12:28:58 Kenshiro [] via bitcoin-dev wrote: > I would like to propose that a "moving checkpoint" is added to the Bitcoin > protocol. It's a very simple rule already implemented in NXT coin: > > - A node will ignore any new block under nodeBlockHeight - N, so the > blockchain becomes truly immutable after N blocks, even during a 51% attack > which thanks to the moving checkpoint can't rewrite history older than the > last N blocks. How would a (potentially, state-sponsored) netsplit lasting longer than N be handled? -- Alistair Mann
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
