BIP100 surpasses BIP101 in one day with 10% of the last 24hr blocks

[alani123]

Three major pools have started tagging their block's coinbase signatures with BIP100 to indicate their support. F2pool, the biggest bitcoin pool, has started supporting BIP100 and all their mined blocks the last 24 hours are tagged to indicate support towards the proposal. But F2pool wasn't the first pool to start showing their support towards the proposal. On August 23 kano.is also started supporting the proposal and was followed by bitclub.


I would consider today a breakthrough for the block size debate. ~25% of the total hashrate has started showing support towards this newly introduced proposal. While Slush pool is the only pool bringing out bip101 blocks, bringing the total on bip101 supporting blocks mined to 5, only over the last day the top pool has contributed more blocks than that. Of course, the largest pool is more influential, but that's not the only reason to believe that BIP100 is doing better. BIP100 is also supported by more pools and the miners in those pools seem to fully stand behind this decision.

What's your take on this? Will BIP100 receive more acceptance? Could it overtake BIP101 to become the accepted solution?
Read about BIP100 here:
http://gtf.org/garzik/bitcoin/BIP100-blocksizechangeproposal.pdf

Update: You can use blocktrail's Pool Distribution statistics to see for yourself. Numbers above should be outdated.

https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/pools

[1714893999]

1714893999

[1714893999]

1714893999

[1714893999]

1714893999

[VirosaGITS]

By going over it fairly rapidly, it look like the new block size would be voted by the miners. Honestly i think this is a great counter offer to the shifty XT core fork.

If only what i read get implemented i think we should consider it. Unless it get bundled with other crap like XT did.

[TheRealSteve]

One thing that's peculiar about the ones signing "BIP100" is that BIP100 actually proposes (loosely, admittedly - and the details have a mathematical incompleteness without explanation) a voting mechanism using "/BVsizeinbytes/" where the exact size is specified in their vote.

So it almost seems more like an anti-vote ("we specifically don't want BIP101") than a vote for a particular size.

[philipma1957]

One thing that's peculiar about the ones signing "BIP100" is that BIP100 actually proposes (loosely, admittedly - and the details have a mathematical incompleteness without explanation) a voting mechanism using "/BVsizeinbytes/" where the exact size is specified in their vote.

So it almost seems more like an anti-vote ("we specifically don't want BIP101") than a vote for a particular size.

I am kind of on page with your take on it.

To me going from 1mb to 8mb  is too much.

This  proposal seems to allow for us to vote in 2mb or 3mb or anything up to 32mb.

I really push for 2mb just to see what happens.  Not radical change but some change.

[TheRealSteve]

Something I found interesting is that the XT code fork and some adoption has motivated people to come up with other schemes as well.  Some not so well thought out, others like Meni's (proposed long before the code fork, though) being well thought out but with some unknown characteristics.  Then there's some others that give a new take on voting by making it costly to increase the block size by making use of the block hash; https://gist.github.com/btcdrak/1c3a323100a912b605b5

The resulting brainstorming and coding efforts are fascinating

[notlist3d]

One thing that's peculiar about the ones signing "BIP100" is that BIP100 actually proposes (loosely, admittedly - and the details have a mathematical incompleteness without explanation) a voting mechanism using "/BVsizeinbytes/" where the exact size is specified in their vote.

So it almost seems more like an anti-vote ("we specifically don't want BIP101") than a vote for a particular size.

I am kind of on page with your take on it.

To me going from 1mb to 8mb  is too much.

This  proposal seems to allow for us to vote in 2mb or 3mb or anything up to 32mb.

I really push for 2mb just to see what happens.  Not radical change but some change.

I think were on the same page. I think radical change is not needed.   Something such as XT really is radical and I think lowering prices.

I think we need to go to up a bit but not sure on exact amount.   I do want them to do it enough we are not doing this again in 6 months or even a year.  But hopefully still not a radical change.

[mavericklm]

we dont need to go up!  

maybe around halving to pump it to 2mb

even under spam attack, the block is under 800kb

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

[philipma1957]

we dont need to go up!  

maybe around halving to pump it to 2mb

even under spam attack, the block is under 800kb

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

we need to show we can go upwards in a controlled organized method not a stampede of lemmings rushing up a hill only to fall off a cliff into the sea of despair.

1 upped to 2  for 12 months just to see what happens is far better then 1 to 20 or 1 to 8

After 12 months we can decide if 3 or 4 is needed. Or wait 12 more months.

[-ck]

Well the thing is, BIP100 is a mechanism for going up if and when we need to, up to a maximum of 32MB which gives us likely a decade of breathing room before needing to be revisited. It is not a block size choice in and of itself. As far as the mining community goes it's the most popular one for us, since it actually hands the block size choice to miners...

[philipma1957]

Well the thing is, BIP100 is a mechanism for going up if and when we need to, up to a maximum of 32MB which gives us likely a decade of breathing room before needing to be revisited. It is not a block size choice in and of itself. As far as the mining community goes it's the most popular one for us, since it actually hands the block size choice to miners...

I like it. A controlled paced upward movement from 1 to 2 to 4 to 6 is far better then a big jump.

[alani123]

BTCChina have started signing the coinbase of their mined blocks with BIP100

[pekatete]

Thus far, looks like all BIP100 block flagging pools are doing so on the pool operators' choice rather than offering miners the vote.
Saying that, the biggest BIP101 flagging pool (slush) only has 3PH mining BIP101 flagged blocks and the rest (~20PH) opting for the status quo, so no surprise there that BIP100 surpassed the lifetime BIP101 blocks in a day.

[BitcoinNewsMagazine]

BTCChina have started signing the coinbase of their mined blocks with BIP100

What is the url of the chart you displayed with Coinbase Blocksize Vote please? The only reference I have right now is http://bitcoinstats.com/network/votes/

[alani123]

BTCChina have started signing the coinbase of their mined blocks with BIP100

What is the url of the chart you displayed with Coinbase Blocksize Vote please? The only reference I have right now is http://bitcoinstats.com/network/votes/

https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/pools

[BitcoinNewsMagazine]

BTCChina have started signing the coinbase of their mined blocks with BIP100

What is the url of the chart you displayed with Coinbase Blocksize Vote please? The only reference I have right now is http://bitcoinstats.com/network/votes/

https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/pools

Thanks! Just added to the article Bitcoin XT ELI5 to help others understand how dangerous Bitcoin XT is.

[freedomno1]

What's your take on this? Will BIP100 receive more acceptance? Could it overtake BIP101 to become the accepted solution?
Read about BIP100 here:
http://gtf.org/garzik/bitcoin/BIP100-blocksizechangeproposal.pdf

Reading over the BIP100 proposal I can see it overtaking BIP101 as the accepted solution simply because its more flexible in addressing the problems at hand than BIP101.
A reasonable proposal will be met with a stronger consensus than one mired with issues in my opinion.

[gallery2000]

Thus far, looks like all BIP100 block flagging pools are doing so on the pool operators' choice rather than offering miners the vote.
Saying that, the biggest BIP101 flagging pool (slush) only has 3PH mining BIP101 flagged blocks and the rest (~20PH) opting for the status quo, so no surprise there that BIP100 surpassed the lifetime BIP101 blocks in a day.

Boycott Slush!

[alani123]

Thus far, looks like all BIP100 block flagging pools are doing so on the pool operators' choice rather than offering miners the vote.
Saying that, the biggest BIP101 flagging pool (slush) only has 3PH mining BIP101 flagged blocks and the rest (~20PH) opting for the status quo, so no surprise there that BIP100 surpassed the lifetime BIP101 blocks in a day.

Boycott Slush!

Well, they provide miners with an option to use their hashpower to mine blocks in support of BIP101. It's not obligatory for people using the pool to also support BIP101. You could just not support BIP101 but keep mining in slush at the same time but that's your decision to make.

[gallery2000]

Thus far, looks like all BIP100 block flagging pools are doing so on the pool operators' choice rather than offering miners the vote.
Saying that, the biggest BIP101 flagging pool (slush) only has 3PH mining BIP101 flagged blocks and the rest (~20PH) opting for the status quo, so no surprise there that BIP100 surpassed the lifetime BIP101 blocks in a day.

Boycott Slush!

Well, the provide miners with an option to use their hashpower to mine blocks in support of BIP101. It's not obligatory for people using the pool to also support BIP101. You could just not not support BIP101 but keep mining in slush at the same time but that's your decision to make.

ok,  I hope BIP101 is not the default.

[alh]

I mine at Slush, and my simplistic understanding is that the "usual/default" port of 3333, that's been used for years, is the BIP100 port. If you want the BIP101 blocks, then you use a different port (3334 I think). This whole BIP101/XT thing has been a complete fiasco in my opinion.

I think a more accurate headline for this thread would have been "BIP101 struggles to get 10% acceptance".

Just my BTC.001 of a BIP100 block (I hope).