> From: Jorge Timón <jti...@jtimon.cc> 

>> "Soft forks aren’t compatible without miner enforcement"
> Compatible with what?

There is a good summary of what is meant by this term in BIP141:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0141.mediawiki

"Backward compatibility
As a soft fork, older software will continue to operate without modification. 
Non-upgraded nodes, however, will not see nor validate the witness data and 
will consider all witness programs as anyone-can-spend scripts (except a few 
edge cases where the witness programs are equal to 0, which the script must 
fail). Wallets should always be wary of anyone-can-spend scripts and treat them 
with suspicion. Non-upgraded nodes are strongly encouraged to upgrade in order 
to take advantage of the new features."

The explanation is however incomplete. If majority hash power does not enforce 
the new rules, the above is incorrect. Granted the word "operate" is vague, but 
clearly what is intended is that "non-upgraded" nodes will not be on a 
different coin. But in fact they would be. The underlying presumption is that 
BIP141 is not only signaled, but enforced by majority hash power.

>> "Soft forks without miner support cause splits".
> No, what causes splits are 3 things:
>
> 1) bugs
> 2) coordination mistakes
> 3) people wanting different rules.

#3 (and possibly #4) is what we're talking about, so it's not at all clear why 
you said "no".

People change their rules, because #3. If majority hash power does not enforce 
this (soft) change, it's a chain split.

> Let me give an example. Let's say all users want change A.
>
> Only 60% miners want it.
> When it activates with LOT=true, will this cause a split?

No, regardless of percentage adoption. You've proposed that it' is majority 
hash power enforced.

Furthermore, the term compatibility (see above) implies that not everyone (your 
impossible presumption of 100%) is aligned.

This is not a debatable subject as far as I'm concerned, but it's worth 
discussion for those who aren't familiar.

e

_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

Reply via email to