[bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Increase block size limit to 2 megabytes

On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 10:37:30AM -0500, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev wrote: > 2) People are committing to spinning up thousands of supports-2mb-nodes > during the grace period. Why wouldn't an attacker be able to counter-sybil-attack that effort? Who are these people? On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 12:45:14PM -0500, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Would Blockstream be willing to help out by running a dozen or two extra > full nodes? I'll remind everyone that Bitcoin Core does not condone participation in network attacks to push controversial protcol changes through. I also checked with Adam Back, who confirmed Blockstream as a company shares those views. For those readers unfamiliar with Sybil attacks, basically what the above does is prevents nodes from being able to finding peers with accurate information about what blockchains exist - the above can be used to prevent nodes from learning about the longest chain for instance, or the existance of substantial support for a minority chain. This is why we've advocated giving users sufficient time to actively opt-in to protocol changes. -- https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 000000000000000008320874843f282f554aa2436290642fcfa81e5a01d78698 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 650 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160206/7a096cda/attachment.sig>