Topic: mandatory pooling (torlike DirectoryServers) to prevent misbehavior in alt.coins (Read 993 times)
August 17, 2011, 05:37:39 PM
a gentle bump
August 17, 2011, 06:32:06 AM
Hello!
I've been reading on various proposals to have an alternate X-coin chains that expect miners to show certain behaviors (donate %percent to Y, etc.)
The big issue is automatic validation of whether the miner really does carry out the condition.
It seems to me that if all miners in such a hypothetical X-coin net were connected to pools which would generally follow the design philosophy of TOR's directory servers ( perhaps with a slight tweak in form of ability to add more supertrusted nodes and/or remove supertrusted nodes that have "fallen from grace" if need arises and a "threshold consensus" is present among the existing ones), it would enable relatively reliable enforcement of hypothetical X-coin "rules of miner conduct".
So, some questions running through my head are:
1) would it be possible to engineer a bitcoin fork that would have such "mandatory pooling" (with "proper" pools being identified via, perhaps, a PKI or by comparing directories from all the servers, or something else...)
2) if yes, how ?
3) would it, indeed allow tackling the issue of "reneging" clients if the network's goals require some rules to be followed by participants?
4) most importantly, could such infrastructure be built on a later date upon an already existing blockchain, or would the chain have to be started anew to implement the "watchdog pools" ?
Discuss
I've been reading on various proposals to have an alternate X-coin chains that expect miners to show certain behaviors (donate %percent to Y, etc.)
The big issue is automatic validation of whether the miner really does carry out the condition.
It seems to me that if all miners in such a hypothetical X-coin net were connected to pools which would generally follow the design philosophy of TOR's directory servers ( perhaps with a slight tweak in form of ability to add more supertrusted nodes and/or remove supertrusted nodes that have "fallen from grace" if need arises and a "threshold consensus" is present among the existing ones), it would enable relatively reliable enforcement of hypothetical X-coin "rules of miner conduct".
So, some questions running through my head are:
1) would it be possible to engineer a bitcoin fork that would have such "mandatory pooling" (with "proper" pools being identified via, perhaps, a PKI or by comparing directories from all the servers, or something else...)
2) if yes, how ?
3) would it, indeed allow tackling the issue of "reneging" clients if the network's goals require some rules to be followed by participants?
4) most importantly, could such infrastructure be built on a later date upon an already existing blockchain, or would the chain have to be started anew to implement the "watchdog pools" ?
Discuss
Jump to: