Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal for extra nonce in block header

2014-10-18 Thread Timo Hanke
Greg, I'd like to ask you to assign a BIP number to this proposal and open another round of discussion. There is now a reference implementation available as pull request #5102 (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5102). It introduces a new version number (3) to properly distinguish the

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal for extra nonce in block header

2014-05-04 Thread Timo Hanke
If changing the structure of the block header, wouldnt you also need to increment the version number to 3? No, in this case I don't think so. Incrementing the version number has two purposes: 1. inform old clients that something new is going on 2. be able to phase out old version numbers and

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal for extra nonce in block header

2014-05-04 Thread Mike Hearn
Although I agree 32 bits for a version is overkill, I really don't like the idea of you simply ignoring the protocol spec to try and reduce your own costs. Especially because in future we should make unknown versions a validation rule, so we can easily trigger hard forks. If this change was

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal for extra nonce in block header

2014-05-04 Thread Timo Hanke
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 02:38:06AM -0700, Mark Friedenbach wrote: I'm not convinced of the necessity of this idea in general, but if it were to be implemented I would recommend serializing the nVersion field as a VarInt (Pieter Wuille's multi-byte serialization format) and using the remaining

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal for extra nonce in block header

2014-05-04 Thread Timo Hanke
On Sun, May 04, 2014 at 05:26:06PM +0200, Mike Hearn wrote: Although I agree 32 bits for a version is overkill, I really don't like the idea of you simply ignoring the protocol spec to try and reduce your own costs. The purpose of the proposal is to change the protocol spec, not to ignore it.

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal for extra nonce in block header

2014-04-27 Thread Melvin Carvalho
On 27 April 2014 09:07, Timo Hanke timo.ha...@web.de wrote: I'd like to put the following draft of a BIP up for discussion. Timo # Abstract There are incentives for miners to find cheap, non-standard ways to generate new work, which are not necessarily in the best interest of the

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal for extra nonce in block header

2014-04-27 Thread Mark Friedenbach
I'm not convinced of the necessity of this idea in general, but if it were to be implemented I would recommend serializing the nVersion field as a VarInt (Pieter Wuille's multi-byte serialization format) and using the remaining space of the 4 bytes as your extra nonce. That would allow