Yesterday's Taproot activation meeting on IRC

Yesterday's Taproot activation meeting on IRC
From: Michael Folkson @ 2021-02-03 14:24 UTC ( / )
  To: bitcoin-dev



Yesterday (February 2nd) we held a relatively unstructured meeting on
Taproot activation on IRC which was open to all.


The conversation log is here:
http://gnusha.org/taproot-activation/2021-02-02.log


The meeting was previously announced here:
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2021-January/018370.html


I will summarize what was discussed as best I can. Please revert to the
conversation log if you have the time as any summary is going to be
imperfect. Any errors or biases are my own and corrections will be
gratefully accepted.


I’ll start with Rusty Russell’s takeaways (many thanks to our Asia Pacific
representatives for joining in the middle of the night by the way) on
Mastodon:


1. Unanimous support for BIP 8. RIP BIP 9.

2. Overwhelming consensus that 1 year is the correct timeout value (it’s
actually defined in blocks, so 26x2016 or maybe 87600).

3. Majority consensus for lockinontimeout false, though Luke Dashjr
strongly opposed.

4. No decision I could see on start time, but 2 months was done for SegWit
and that didn’t seem too objectionable.


https://bitcoinhackers.org/@rusty/105664386728806153


I personally think this is a solid summary though I do want to point out it
wasn’t only Luke that opposed lockinontimeout=false. There were other
individuals who also opposed lockinontimeout=false but at least from my
reading that was the minority opinion. Luke concluded there wasn’t clear
consensus on it and that even if lockinontimeout=false was eventually
chosen as a Bitcoin Core default he would be running lockinontimeout=true
on his node.


In terms of the PRs, the following BIP 8 PRs were merged following the
meeting.


https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1020


https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1021


The latter was merged due to an observation from Jonas Nick in the PR
comments and during the meeting that without it nodes could end up on the
wrong chain in a scenario where they run lockinontimeout=true with most
nodes running lockinontimeout=false.


The Bitcoin Core PR #19573 requires additional work from its author and
further review before it can be considered for merging.


I do want to thank the large number of participants for engaging in the
discussion in the spirit of wanting to make progress on Taproot activation
and for gracefully allowing me to interrupt them and keep the discussion on
topic. The vast majority of the time this level of bluntness (and pushing
away slightly off topic questions) is not desired or required in Bitcoin
technical meetings. I hope those who were interrupted during this meeting
will return and ask their questions now a meeting of that sheer size is
over.


We are in the process of attempting to organize a follow up more closely
following the format of John Newbery’s Bitcoin Core PR review club which
will be lower level, technical and focused on the Bitcoin Core PR #19573.
The Bitcoin Core PR review club is also open to all but given its more
technical nature it shouldn’t present the same challenges as yesterday’s
meeting.


Thanks to Alejandro De La Torre for providing an update on his website (
taprootactivation.com) following the meeting. Chun Wang (co-founder of
F2Pool, ~ 16 percent of global hash rate) has decided to support BIP
8(false,1 year).

-- 
Michael Folkson
Email: michaelfolkson@gmail•com
Keybase: michaelfolkson
PGP: 43ED C999 9F85 1D40 EAF4 9835 92D6 0159 214C FEE3
From: Michael Folkson @ 2021-04-14 11:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion

Yesterday there was a Taproot activation meeting on the
##taproot-activation Freenode channel.

The agenda was posted in advance to the mailing list by BitcoinMechanic.
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2021-April/018769.html

The conversation log is here:
http://gnusha.org/taproot-activation/2021-04-13.log

Discussion focused on an alternative release to Bitcoin Core with the
naming of the release not yet finalized. Some participants expressed
concern of having "Bitcoin Core" in the name e.g. "Bitcoin Core +
Taproot" as it would be confusing to users and give them the mistaken
impression that it had been signed off by Bitcoin Core maintainers.

The activation mechanism(s) for this alternative release is Speedy
Trial (BIP 8, consistent use of block height) followed by BIP 8 (1
year, LOT=true). The BIP 8 (1 year, LOT=true) is only started assuming
Taproot hasn't activated during the Speedy Trial deployment.

Draft release notes for this alternative release are here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Uhn1SEDMAqQkzkPZ4B5lPTSjUFEXKPndt_oBI4eUm7A/edit?usp=sharing

The GitHub repo for this alternative release is here:
https://github.com/BitcoinActivation/bitcoin

To compare this to the most likely activation mechanism(s) in Bitcoin
Core at this point. If the Core PR #21377 is merged in its current
form then the activation mechanism in Bitcoin Core will be Speedy
Trial (BIP to be decided, mix of block height and MTP). The starttime
and timeout will use MTP and the activation point will use block
height.

The Core PR #21377 is here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21377

In addition a BIP PR for the Core release has been opened here with
suggested finalized parameters:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1104

If these plans continue as is Bitcoin Core and this alternative
release won't be entirely compatible due to startheight and timeout
being defined according to MTP and block height respectively. In the
majority of cases they should both activate at the same block height
(or not activate) but there are unlikely edge cases where one
activates and one doesn't (in addition to a possible timewarp attack
on MTP).

The use of MTP in Speedy Trial for Bitcoin Core has been discussed
extensively and reviewers' opinions are summarized here:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21377#issuecomment-818758277

From this point on I will try to stay as neutral as I can and just
summarize the facts to keep this list informed but anyone can review
my past mailing list posts to get my personal views if you are
interested.

As a reminder anyone can host a meeting on the ##taproot-activation
channel. All they need to do is contact me to book a time slot and
ideally post an agenda to this mailing list in advance of the meeting.
That meeting host will have the ability to issue warnings and if
necessary kick participants if the meeting host feels they are
disrupting the meeting or diverting conversation from the agenda.

-- 
Michael Folkson
Email: michaelfolkson@gmail•com
Keybase: michaelfolkson
PGP: 43ED C999 9F85 1D40 EAF4 9835 92D6 0159 214C FEE3


 permalink raw reply	[|nested]