I have written a height based reference implementation as well as updated the
BIP text in the following proposals
"lockinontimeout" was just an implementation detail to allow BIP8 the BIP9
implementation code. With the change to height based, we can dispense with it
entirely.
So the two changes
On Wednesday 05 July 2017 8:06:33 AM Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> These proposals for gratuitous orphaning are reckless and coersive.
> We have a professional obligation to first do no harm, and amplifying
> orphaning which can otherwise easily be avoided violates it.
Nothing is "orpha
Just as an implementation consideration, time basis creates complexity. There
are no other reasons to index by time, but many to index by height. The
time-based activation window of BIP9 forces nodes to either index by time or
scan the chain.
e
> On Jul 6, 2017, at 10:20 AM, Jorge Timón via bi
I'm all for using height instead of time. That was my preference for
bip9 all along, but my arguments at the time apparently weren't
convincing.
Regarding luke's proposal, the only advantage I see is that it would
allow nodes that don't know a deployment that gets activated to issue
a warning, lik
