Skip to content

Conversation

@fdoving
Copy link
Contributor

@fdoving fdoving commented Nov 6, 2021

10x the default counting periods.
Previous period was 2016 blocks or about 1.4 day.
Proposed period is 20160 blocks or about 14 days.

  • The LOCKED_IN period is extended from 1.4 to 14 days, during which non upgraded nodes will be warned of the upcoming fork.
  • 10 times as expensive to potentially try to force activation with rented hashpower.
  • Slower activation. Previous minimum activation time from counting starts, about 3 days, with this proposal about 30 days.

@fdoving
Copy link
Contributor Author

fdoving commented Nov 6, 2021

This was discussed in the dev-meeting on discord yesterday.

@fdoving fdoving changed the title consensu: adjust bip9 periods consensus: adjust bip9 periods Nov 6, 2021
10x the default counting periods.
Previous period was 2016 blocks or about 1.4 day.
Proposed period is 20160 blocks or about 14 days.

- The LOCKED_IN period is extended from 1.4 to 14 days, during which non upgraded nodes will be warned of the upcoming fork.
- 10 times as expensive to potentially try to force activation with rented hashpower.
- Slower activation. Previous minimum activation time from counting starts, about 3 days, with this proposal about 30 days.
@fdoving fdoving force-pushed the fdov-adjust-bip9-period branch from ec898a3 to d6145af Compare November 6, 2021 11:14
@fdoving fdoving closed this Nov 6, 2021
Copy link
Collaborator

@TronBlack TronBlack left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We don't want to change the nPowTargetTimespan or the default nMinerConfirmationWindow.

We should use just the overrides.

The defaults will be used for activation as it reads the chain.

@fdoving
Copy link
Contributor Author

fdoving commented Nov 7, 2021

I was planning on re-opening this issue once i figured out the glitch. (nPowTargetTimespan) - but I pushed to the branch before re-openning, so github won't allow it.

New PR: #1124 will comment there.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants