Pages:
Author

Topic: Taproot proposal - page 17. (Read 11651 times)

legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 10611
March 04, 2021, 10:47:33 PM
BIP8 (true), also know as LOT=true, this mandate upgrade after 2016 block height has been reached.
...it mandates upgrade regardless of how many are signalling for the upgrade.

Quote
BIP8 (false), also know as LOT=false, this makes upgrade to fail after 2016 block has been reached.
This is wrong, LOT=false simply disables LOT, it doesn't do anything to fail/pass the upgrade. The upgrade can go ahead as before when it reaches the threshold of how many should signal for it (ie. 95% of the blocks).
legendary
Activity: 1456
Merit: 5874
light_warrior ... 🕯️
March 04, 2021, 07:09:02 PM
Quote from: Cøbra
IMO miner's malicious behavior as happened with Segwit is unlikely to repeat itself. I guess people will run UASF code anyway, but it's a dangerous trend.
I would be grateful if someone could answer the two questions below. + Can anyone point me to where I can read about these events? (and it would be great if someone could point me to key links to the scaling debate that started in 2017).

  • Why Insane Price Lowers Engagement in the Taproot Debate?
  • Under what conditions can Taproot create backward compatibility issues?
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 4795
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
March 04, 2021, 06:15:31 PM
Can't seem to see anywhere what the word LOT actually references.
This is BIP8. If you want to know more about it, you can check BIP8 on GitHub. It  specifies an alternative to BIP9 that corrects for a number of perceived mistakes. Block heights are used for start and timeout rather than POSIX timestamps.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0008.mediawiki

It is about to force an upgrade or not to force an upgrade based on timeoutheight. 

BIP8 (true), also know as LOT=true, this mandate upgrade after 2016 block height has been reached.

BIP8 (false), also know as LOT=false, this makes upgrade to fail after 2016 block has been reached.

hero member
Activity: 1241
Merit: 623
OGRaccoon
March 04, 2021, 08:33:42 AM
What exactly is LOT standing for?  

Can't seem to see anywhere what the word LOT actually references.

** Edit **

Found it..

lockinontimeout (LOT)
legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1823
March 04, 2021, 06:05:15 AM

I'm still not convinced of that.  It's not necessarily accurate to say that a UASF can't be contentious.  I'm of the view that any time one "side" is trying to force the hand of another "side", then it's contentious.  Bitcoin depends on users, devs and miners working in unison.  Power struggles aren't conducive to that aim.


That’s the ideal path, but men/women being political creatures, never forget that Jihan Wu, and his friends used signalling as a political tool to hold Segwit because it would disable covert ASIC-Boost.

I believe without BIP148, Segwit would be delayed, and delayed, and delayed. Plus this is what decentralized governance is. There will be discord.
legendary
Activity: 3948
Merit: 3191
Leave no FUD unchallenged
March 04, 2021, 03:02:26 AM

I'm still not convinced of that.  It's not necessarily accurate to say that a UASF can't be contentious.  I'm of the view that any time one "side" is trying to force the hand of another "side", then it's contentious.  Bitcoin depends on users, devs and miners working in unison.  Power struggles aren't conducive to that aim.
legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1823
March 04, 2021, 02:33:09 AM
This upgrade is becoming more, and more complex

Chris Belcher is making the case for flag day activation.
https://old.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/lwvg78/making_the_case_for_flag_day_activation_of_taproot/


Didn’t we already learn from BIP148/UASF that an intolerant minority could still end with the overwhelming majority of the hashing power? I thought the upgrade was LOT=true from start to end, I was surprised that there was another political drama starting, with a “LOT=false” vs. “LOT=true”.

Shaolinfry, give us the wisdom to find the path forward, https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/moving-towards-user-activated-soft-fork-activation-1805060
copper member
Activity: 37
Merit: 14
March 03, 2021, 12:55:01 PM
This upgrade is becoming more, and more complex

Chris Belcher is making the case for flag day activation.
https://old.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/lwvg78/making_the_case_for_flag_day_activation_of_taproot/
legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1823
March 03, 2021, 05:16:09 AM

This upgrade is becoming more, and more complex than I thought. I was just trolling “in hoping” to see another drama between the miners, and the community again. I am starting to regret that Haha.

Here’s an link about LOT by Bitcoin Magazine, it’s confusing, https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/lottrue-or-lotfalse-this-is-the-last-hurdle-before-taproot-activation

Quote

But if less than half of all miners use LOT=true and the signaling period expires, the Bitcoin blockchain could “split” between LOT=true and LOT=false nodes. LOT=true nodes would only accept signaling blocks, even if non-signaling blocks make a longer blockchain. They would essentially be on their own “LOT=true chain.” LOT=false nodes, meanwhile, would reject the LOT-true chain in favor of the longer “LOT=false chain.”


Why didn’t the developers keep it simple, and have LOT=true as the default? Close to 90% of the miners already support Taproot, https://taprootactivation.com/
legendary
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3080
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
February 23, 2021, 08:39:35 PM
There probably won't be a 0.21.1. There's a migration[1] scheduled on Github that will transition from 0.21.0 directly to 22.0. It's named that instead of 0.22.0.

No, you're confused.  The next major version after 0.21 will be 22, but consensus changes are not activated in major releases (as they contain lots of extra features that might make some users unable to upgrade or force them to downgrade).


Development works like this:


0.19.0 --> 0.20.0 --> 0.21.0 --> 22.0 --> ...
     \          \          \
     |->0.19.1  |-> 0.20.1 |-> 0.21.1
     |->0.19.2  |-> 0.20.2 ...
     |->0.19.3  ...
     ...


So the minor releases are all forked off an earlier copy of the software and have fixes back ported to them.

The post you were seeing was discussing dropping the "0." in the master branch.

legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org
February 23, 2021, 01:05:02 AM
a special "taproot ready" flag embedded in their mined blocks

Is this flag a default behavior of 0.21.1 or do they set the flag manually?

They have to set it manually and Bitcoin Core doesn't set any flags of blocks on its own. Miners use the submitblock RPC call with the flag set in the block they submit.

There probably won't be a 0.21.1. There's a migration[1] scheduled on Github that will transition from 0.21.0 directly to 22.0. It's named that instead of 0.22.0.


[1]: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20851
copper member
Activity: 37
Merit: 14
February 21, 2021, 08:51:18 PM
a special "taproot ready" flag embedded in their mined blocks

Is this flag a default behavior of 0.21.1 or do they set the flag manually?
legendary
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3080
February 21, 2021, 12:42:22 PM
Does activation just mean a node is running 0.21.1 or do they have to take extra steps after the the upgrade to 0.21.1?

Put simply...

Either:

  • Miners activate the fork. This happens when a certain % of miners are making blocks with a special "taproot ready" flag embedded in their mined blocks. This % of blocks must continue for ~2 weeks (for 2016 blocks)
  • Users activate the fork. This happens when the timeframe for activating the fork expires

It's a little more complicated than though. Not much.

As of yet, the % for triggering the 2016 block lock-in stage hasn't been decided. Suggested figures are 90% or 95% of blocks (95% was used for some recent fork activations). The overall timeframe is also not exactly decided, but 1 year (measured in blocks...) seems to be a popular suggestion.
copper member
Activity: 37
Merit: 14
February 19, 2021, 12:54:23 PM
Not in a meaningful sense.

When new consensus changes are added to bitcoin they are added in advance, completely deactivated and inert.  Later a version will be produced that doesn't change anything except arming the activation.

This avoids the risk that activation will be interrupted by unrelated issues in a new version.  It also gives more time for developers to test the fully integrated version and reduced risk that issues introduced by merging will go undetected.

So 0.21.0 doesn't have taproot support and will continue to not have any taproot support even after taproot activates.

Thanks! Does activation just mean a node is running 0.21.1 or do they have to take extra steps after the the upgrade to 0.21.1?
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
February 19, 2021, 03:20:27 AM
Doesn't 0.21.0 contain the code for Taproot?

Not in a meaningful sense.

When new consensus changes are added to bitcoin they are added in advance, completely deactivated and inert.  Later a version will be produced that doesn't change anything except arming the activation.

This avoids the risk that activation will be interrupted by unrelated issues in a new version.  It also gives more time for developers to test the fully integrated version and reduced risk that issues introduced by merging will go undetected.

So 0.21.0 doesn't have taproot support and will continue to not have any taproot support even after taproot activates.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 4795
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
February 18, 2021, 03:00:17 PM
Doesn't 0.21.0 contain the code for Taproot?
This thread is about Taproot implementation, Taproot was introduced into Bitcoin core in October 2020, but not yet implemented as the implementation is a gradual process. On December 01, 2020, Bitcoin Core version 0.21.0 was released in which Taproot's code was  available for testing. If you scroll up, you will see a post where fillippone posted about it the day Bitcoin Core 0.21.0 was available.
copper member
Activity: 37
Merit: 14
February 18, 2021, 01:44:59 PM
Excited to see how many nodes are running 0.21.0
Which has what to do with this thread? Smiley

Doesn't 0.21.0 contain the code for Taproot?
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 4795
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
February 18, 2021, 09:58:06 AM
Quote
Bitcoin Taproot Upgrade Nailed Down for July, but Some Finer Details Still Aren’t Finalized. A release date and activation timeline are set for Bitcoin’s Taproot upgrade, but developers and other stakeholders are still debating the best method to coordinate Bitcoin’s biggest upgrade since SegWit.

Per a public IRC chat discussion, the code for the fully primed-and-ready Taproot upgrade will be deployed sometime between March 17 and March 31 (or April if necessary), but the actual signaling that kick-starts the activation process probably won’t start until July.

If everything goes as planned, then Bitcoin’s “economic majority” (miners and node operators who run Bitcoin’s code) could update within two weeks of the signaling period’s start. Come August 2022, Taproot’s activation period will reach its timeoutheight and signaling will end.

Quote
With a date set for the end of March and the bulk of the activation parameters chosen in BIP8, the final question to answer for Taproot’s deployment is whether or not to include the “user activated soft fork” measure from the get-go or not.


I was excited to know taproot activation is coming soon, which will be this year. But, there is a question in the link that 'what happens if the mining pools don’t signal to activate Taproot?

Taproot will ship by BIP8 in late March and activation is slated for July, so this question will have to be answered within the month.

https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-taproot-upgrade-july-finer-details-not-finalized



 
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
February 18, 2021, 03:48:32 AM
Excited to see how many nodes are running 0.21.0
Which has what to do with this thread? Smiley
Pages:
Jump to: