Post your SegWit questions here - open discussion - big week for Bitcoin!

[X7]

Hoping that everything goes smoothly on the SegWit roll out this week, not sure how the Ver blockades will impede the implementation.

[1714801585]

1714801585

[thezerg]

Let's hope everything goes well and nobody can stop it.

[bitkilo]

How many have now updated to 0.13.1, they need at least 95% don't they?
Do we know if all the wallet providers are supporting the upgrade?

[ScripterRon]

How many have now updated to 0.13.1, they need at least 95% don't they?
Do we know if all the wallet providers are supporting the upgrade?

SegWit needs 95% of the miners to upgrade.  You can look at the block version to see if the miner has updated (version is x'2000002' for SegWit).  So far, I'm seeing around 1 block in 10 that has the SegWit version.  So there is a long ways to go yet.  I already have a SegWit transaction in the blockchain just waiting for the support to be locked in (you can create a P2SH-P2WPKH transaction but you can't spend it yet).

[unamis76]

not sure how the Ver blockades will impede the implementation.

Is this a possibility?

I highly doubt someone will hinder adoption or make it lower in any way. Whoever does it would be hurting himself too.

[achow101]

How many have now updated to 0.13.1, they need at least 95% don't they?
Do we know if all the wallet providers are supporting the upgrade?

SegWit needs 95% of the miners to upgrade.  You can look at the block version to see if the miner has updated (version is x'2000002' for SegWit).  So far, I'm seeing around 1 block in 10 that has the SegWit version.  So there is a long ways to go yet.  I already have a SegWit transaction in the blockchain just waiting for the support to be locked in (you can create a P2SH-P2WPKH transaction but you can't spend it yet).

Signalling hasn't actually begun yet. Signalling officially begins at the start of the first retarget period after November 15th. We still have another day or two to go before we get there, then signalling officially begins and we will see lots of segwit blocks being produced.

[Chris!]

I use mycelium for the most part (and paper wallets). Has anyone heard if / when they're implementing the upgrade to segwit? Once it is implemented should I sweep my paper wallet or does it matter?

[achow101]

I use mycelium for the most part (and paper wallets). Has anyone heard if / when they're implementing the upgrade to segwit?

See https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/ for adoption status of most Bitcoin software.

Once it is implemented should I sweep my paper wallet or does it matter?

It doesn't matter. The Bitcoin on your paper wallet will still be safe. Also, I'm not sure how paper wallets will work with segwit and how they would work with it.

[yefi]

Is this a possibility?

I highly doubt someone will hinder adoption or make it lower in any way. Whoever does it would be hurting himself too.

Possibility? Seems like a probability to me. Bitcoin.com and ViaBTC are sustaining ~10% of the hashing power meaning they can veto the upgrade and they seem ideologically bent on on-chain, block-size scaling.

[xdrpx]

How does the separated signatures in scriptPubKey that Segregated Witness nodes will be able to see, be split from the main input field of a transaction while reducing the size of the block? Won't the people running full nodes have to download this separated part of the signature output called segregated witness still and it would still add to additional data being downloaded because now a block can hold and have more capacity + the segwit signatures has to be downloaded as a separate component?

[achow101]

How does the separated signatures in scriptPubKey that Segregated Witness nodes will be able to see, be split from the main input field of a transaction while reducing the size of the block?

It does not. That is a common misconception. Segwit does not make the block size smaller; it is a block size increase.

Won't the people running full nodes have to download this separated part of the signature output called segregated witness still and it would still add to additional data being downloaded because now a block can hold and have more capacity + the segwit signatures has to be downloaded as a separate component?

Yes. Segwit sigs are not a separate component. They are part of the transaction, not a separate structure.

[ScripterRon]

How does the separated signatures in scriptPubKey that Segregated Witness nodes will be able to see, be split from the main input field of a transaction while reducing the size of the block? Won't the people running full nodes have to download this separated part of the signature output called segregated witness still and it would still add to additional data being downloaded because now a block can hold and have more capacity + the segwit signatures has to be downloaded as a separate component?

There are now two transaction formats - legacy and segwit. 

A node that doesn't support segwit will receive transactions in the legacy format.  These transactions will not have the witness data, thus no signatures or public keys.  This works because the witness program allows anybody to spend the output.  A node that supports segwit will not accept a legacy transaction that attempts to spend an output using a witness program.  Thus the need to get 95% of the miners to support segwit.

A non-segwit node won't accept a segwit transaction because the format is invalid by the old rules.  So you need to get a large number of non-mining nodes to also support segwit so that the segwit transactions will be relayed across the network.

You have control over the type of transactions that you create since the initial implementation of segwit uses a P2SH address (address starts with '3') instead of a P2PKH address (address starts with '1').  Existing wallets will continue to create legacy transactions that will be accepted by both types of nodes.

I have tested this using my own wallet and Bitcoin Core 0.13.1.  Sending a segwit transaction results in a reject with the message that segwit is not active yet.  Sending a legacy transaction spending a segwit output results in a reject with the message that the witness data is missing.

[Quickseller]

It would not be smart to not implement SegWit if/when it becomes part of the mainnet.

Some Bitcoin companies may however not "support" SegWit and would prefer that it not be implemented. My question is, how can a non-mining entity that is part of the Bitcoin economy and/or ecosystem show their support/non-support of SegWit? Even if an entity does not support SegWit they may prepare for SegWit in the event that it becomes part of Bitcoin despite their wishes.

[OgNasty]

My question is, how can a non-mining entity that is part of the Bitcoin economy and/or ecosystem show their support/non-support of SegWit?

The best thing a non-miner can do to support the network and signal their support for SegWit would be to run Bitcoin Core 0.13.1.  You can see that currently 30% of the nodes on the network are running 0.13.1.
https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/

You could also find a site that offers a voting mechanism to make your opinion heard.  Here's one for example: https://vote.bitcoin.com/arguments/segregated-witness-is-a-good-short-term-approach-to-scaling-bitcoin-capacity

Currently, 52 of the last 300 blocks (17%) signaled SegWit support, and 32 of the last 142 blocks (23%).  You can monitor progress here:
https://data.bitcoinity.org/bitcoin/block_version/7d?c=block_version&t=a

[achow101]

It would not be smart to not implement SegWit if/when it becomes part of the mainnet.

Why? Segwit brings many improvements to Bitcoin that we need, including scaling. Many wallets have or are in the process of implementing segwit.

Some Bitcoin companies may however not "support" SegWit and would prefer that it not be implemented. My question is, how can a non-mining entity that is part of the Bitcoin economy and/or ecosystem show their support/non-support of SegWit?

Nodes that signal segwit have the NODE_WITNESS service bit set. So to check if a node supports segwit, just check for that service bit.

Even if an entity does not support SegWit they may prepare for SegWit in the event that it becomes part of Bitcoin despite their wishes.

Segwit is backwards compatible. If you don't like segwit, you can continue to use Bitcoin as you do now with almost zero impact on you.


Edit:

It would not be smart to not implement SegWit if/when it becomes part of the mainnet.

Why? Segwit brings many improvements to Bitcoin that we need, including scaling. Many wallets have or are in the process of implementing segwit.

Look closer. That was a double negative.

Hah. Whooops.

[doc12]

My question is, how can a non-mining entity that is part of the Bitcoin economy and/or ecosystem show their support/non-support of SegWit?

The best thing a non-miner can do to support the network and signal their support for SegWit would be to run Bitcoin Core 0.13.1.  You can see that currently 30% of the nodes on the network are running 0.13.1.
https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/

Actually there are already around 33% Segwit nodes ( NODE_WITNESS flag )  1777 of 5434

[Thura]

Why is segwit BIP9 version bit ( blockversion 00100000000000000000000000000010b, 536870914, 0x20000002)

signaling decreasing right now?



(Source: http://bitcoin.sipa.be/ver9-2k.png from 2016-11-20 21:44 UTC)

[achow101]

Why is segwit BIP9 version bit ( blockversion 00100000000000000000000000000010b, 536870914, 0x20000002)

signaling decreasing right now?



(Source: http://bitcoin.sipa.be/ver9-2k.png from 2016-11-20 21:44 UTC)

Probably just the normal variation in who finds the blocks. The real number to look at is the signalling over 2016 blocks, the red line. That one is steadily increasing.

[OgNasty]

My question is, how can a non-mining entity that is part of the Bitcoin economy and/or ecosystem show their support/non-support of SegWit?

The best thing a non-miner can do to support the network and signal their support for SegWit would be to run Bitcoin Core 0.13.1.  You can see that currently 30% of the nodes on the network are running 0.13.1.
https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/

Currently, 52 of the last 300 blocks (17%) signaled SegWit support, and 32 of the last 142 blocks (23%).  You can monitor progress here:
https://data.bitcoinity.org/bitcoin/block_version/7d?c=block_version&t=a

Actually there are already around 33% Segwit nodes ( NODE_WITNESS flag )  1777 of 5434

What I said was that 30% of the nodes on the network are running 0.13.1.  Currently it is 30.27%.

Now showing that 60 of the last 300 blocks signaled SegWit support (20%). 

[-ck]

It would not be smart to not implement SegWit if/when it becomes part of the mainnet.

Why? Segwit brings many improvements to Bitcoin that we need, including scaling. Many wallets have or are in the process of implementing segwit.

Look closer. That was a double negative.