On 08/12/2017 12:44 PM, Jorge Timón wrote:
> A simpler first step would be for libbitcoin to support bip113 and
> bip68/bip112.
These are implemented in v3.3.0.
> Ideally by also implementing bip9 for sf activation, which
> could be used for segwit too.
Since bip9 cannot reactivate after its window closes there is no reason
to implement it for CSV.
e
> On 10 Aug 2017 21:09, "Eric Voskuil" wrote:
> On Aug 10, 2017, at 5:00 AM, Luke Dashjr wrote:
>> On Thursday 10 August 2017 11:46:23 AM mlmikael@??? wrote:
>>> The logics will kick in in 12 days ( https://xbt.eu ) so I guess.. in
>>> absence of Segwit, libbitcoin deployments will fork off the main
>>> chain and
>>> also be unable to make transactions, until Segwit is implemented?
>>
>> Segwit is a softfork, so old nodes will continue to operate fine,
>> just with a
>> loss of full-node security. But alternative implementations never
>> quite have full-node security anyway simply because they can't be
>> guaranteed to enforce the rules exactly.
>
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0050.mediawiki
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0050.mediawiki>
>
>> That being said, it would be a good idea for libbitcoin to update
>> so its
>> wallet can take advantage of the new features.
>
> Pull requests welcome.
>
> e
::
Re: [Libbitcoin] What about Segwit?…
