Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Velvet fork #29

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Velvet fork #29

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

sdaveas
Copy link
Owner

@sdaveas sdaveas commented Aug 26, 2020

From hard fork to velvet fork

@gtklocker gtklocker requested a review from dionyziz September 7, 2020 08:47
paper/sections/velvet-fork.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
paper/sections/velvet-fork.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
the Bitcoin community. However, a velvet fork can also serve the purposes of
our client by utilizing part of the auxiliary bytes of the coinbase
transaction. As a result, our proposed client can be used without the need of
adjusting the size of block headers; In fact, recent
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

no capitalization after semicolon

the MMR root. However, since the verification of proofs is constant to the size
of the blocks under the optimistic scheme we adopt, the added cost will also be
constant. We thus claim that our client remains efficient under a velvet fork
as the gas usage will only be increased by a constant factor.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This constant factor may be large due to velvet fork security assumptions (m needs to be adjusted to account for this fact). Hence, this may make our implementation for velvet forks inefficient. In fact, the exact constants are not even known theoretically, only asymptotically. I suggest we are a bit more conservative on this claim.

sdaveas and others added 2 commits September 7, 2020 16:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants