{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwet","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwet","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2013-03-13\n📝 Original message:On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Luke-Jr \u003cluke at dashjr.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e FROM block 262144 to block 393216 (hard fork #1):\n\u003e - Never make, and reject any block that includes more than 24391 transaction\n\u003e modifications on its own (this *should* be equivalent to 1 MB)\n\u003e - (this rules can make older client backports safe unless a reorg is more than\n\u003e 6 blocks deep)\n\nI'm not a fan of the two stages, your before block 262144 part sounds\nfine to me, though I thought the safe number was closer to 5000.\nPerhaps 4911?\nThe goal here is to pick something which is _absolutely sure_ to be\nless than what pre-0.8 accepts (so that its is just a soft fork), but\nit need not be needlessly smaller than that.\n\nI think we can accept some small risk of \"backport\" clients getting\nstuck after large reorgs after there has been sufficient upgrade time.\n Performance reasons mean that its very likely no one will be mining\non those nodes by then, and so if they get stuck they'll just need to\nmanually unstick them. Difficulty is high enough that its unlikely\nanything important will remain stuck long enough for a malicious party\nto exploit them by mining blocks on the stuck fork.\n\nBy allowing that risk you halve the complexity of your change by not\nrequiring two hard forks.  The 'never make' half of it would probably\nbe fine.\n\nAs far as the size change, that should be a separate process after\nwe've proven the ability to make a hardforking change with something\nlow risk/low controversy like this, and only after someone has\nactually shown that the software is stable under those conditions lest\nwe get another issue like we have now where the increase in block\ntarget from 500k/250k to 1MB by a miner exposed inadequate testing."}