2ef9f2a9deb8482d69d0ef710bcfe6e61e1c1b
1 Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org> 2 Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org 3 [172.17.192.35]) 4 by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21778905 5 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; 6 Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:31:24 +0000 (UTC) 7 X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 8 Received: from outmail149055.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail149055.authsmtp.co.uk 9 [62.13.149.55]) 10 by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 505CA1A7 11 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; 12 Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:31:20 +0000 (UTC) 13 Received: from mail-c232.authsmtp.com (mail-c232.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.232]) 14 by punt21.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u6FGVGM8067344; 15 Fri, 15 Jul 2016 17:31:16 +0100 (BST) 16 Received: from petertodd.org (ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com 17 [52.5.185.120]) (authenticated bits=0) 18 by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u6FGVDvn053019 19 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); 20 Fri, 15 Jul 2016 17:31:14 +0100 (BST) 21 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) 22 by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 309E6400E9; 23 Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:28:45 +0000 (UTC) 24 Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) 25 id 933052059F; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 12:31:12 -0400 (EDT) 26 Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 12:31:12 -0400 27 From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> 28 To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>, 29 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> 30 Message-ID: <20160715163112.GA9125@fedora-21-dvm> 31 References: <201607151608.52063.luke@dashjr.org> 32 MIME-Version: 1.0 33 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; 34 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j" 35 Content-Disposition: inline 36 In-Reply-To: <201607151608.52063.luke@dashjr.org> 37 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) 38 X-Server-Quench: 8c770d3a-4aa9-11e6-829e-00151795d556 39 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: 40 http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse 41 X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR 42 aAdMdwcUEkAYAgsB AmAbWlNeU1x7WGc7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq 43 T0pMXVMcUQMednp1 QEAeVxpydgwIf3ty bQhqDXdcXBB5JFt5 44 Ex9dCGwHMGF9YGIW BV1YdwJRcQRDe0tA b1YxNiYHcQ5VPz4z 45 GA41ejw8IwAXEzhc XhwWZU8KTU8XEyV0 SRcYVR8OJQVUA21t 46 f1hucwdGWA4YNEl6 aAJ6Mf9/ 47 X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1037:706 48 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) 49 X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 52.5.185.120/25 50 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own 51 anti-virus system. 52 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW 53 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 54 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on 55 smtp1.linux-foundation.org 56 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Status updates for BIP 9, 68, 112, and 113 57 X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org 58 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 59 Precedence: list 60 List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> 61 List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, 62 <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> 63 List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> 64 List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> 65 List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> 66 List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, 67 <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> 68 X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:31:24 -0000 69 70 71 --nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j 72 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 73 Content-Disposition: inline 74 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 75 76 On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 04:08:51PM +0000, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote: 77 > Daniel Cousens opened the issue a few weeks ago, that BIP 9 should progre= 78 ss to=20 79 > Accepted stage. However, as an informational BIP, it is not entirely clea= 80 r on=20 81 > whether it falls in the Draft/Accepted/Final classification of proposals= 82 =20 83 > requiring implementation, or the Draft/Active classification like process= 84 =20 85 > BIPs. Background of this discussion is at: 86 > https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/413 87 > (Discussion on the GitHub BIPs repo is *NOT* recommended, hence bringing = 88 this=20 89 > topic to the mailing list) 90 91 As of writing the text of BIP68 says: 92 93 'This BIP is to be deployed by "versionbits" BIP9 using bit 0.' 94 95 Essentially including BIP9 as part of the BIP68 standard; BIP68 could have 96 equally been written by including some or all of the text of BIP9. If it had 97 done that, that text would be part of a "Standard BIP" rather than 98 "Informational BIP", thus I'll argue that BIP9 should also be a "Standard B= 99 IP" 100 101 Also, note that if we ever modified BIP9, we'd most likely do so with a new 102 BIP, and in soft-forks using that new standard, would refer to the new BIP = 103 #. 104 105 > Reviewing the criteria for status changes, my opinion is that: 106 > - BIPs 68, 112, 113, and 141 are themselves implementations of BIP 9 107 > -- therefore, BIP 9 falls under the Draft/Accepted/Final class 108 > - BIPs 68, 112, and 113 have been deployed to the network successfully 109 > -- therefore, BIP 9 has satisfied the conditions of not only Accepted sta= 110 tus, 111 > but also Final status 112 > -- therefore, BIPs 68, 112, and 113 also ought to be Final status 113 >=20 114 > If there are no objections, I plan to update the status to Final for BIPs= 115 9,=20 116 > 68, 112, and 113 in one month. Since all four BIPs are currently Draft, I= 117 also=20 118 > need at least one author from each BIP to sign-off on promoting them to (= 119 and=20 120 > beyond) Accepted. 121 >=20 122 > BIP 9: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com> 123 > Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> 124 > Greg Maxwell <greg@xiph.org> 125 > Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> 126 127 ACK "Final" status. 128 129 --=20 130 https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 131 132 --nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j 133 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" 134 Content-Description: Digital signature 135 136 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- 137 138 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXiQ/NAAoJEGOZARBE6K+yagsH/2xlz8aAhmZ3uu7khgIsuwzE 139 A2YO+xdw62LcxTcBqyMBMTQwDGr/eRcftZo5/ClpAHIyBXLqpCf/ITQfraMVsxih 140 lThnrqSP0+GJPYyNZFBTwRsVvp2ja1RIbVJrcGktDjve90452VTEyI5pjtmcjJba 141 3CWU4p9/etMqsnEXLpB+qfztTsOd6yXMHGuKrrm441EG9cE/g3ijxi0bOhNE1sn5 142 4Ed3fEoxi5xZdnClb06P/FGt8L9vNo0UYKAaK1OF4qbPC8ubSSch18yU8AG25YdA 143 B9/MFeFtf1qK2siZtusfVlZzsuMqXqm2ggBgd4XjdSR2wEmj75XDeiI5ZHfgdRw= 144 =gwGj 145 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 146 147 --nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j-- 148