Do you would support OP_CTV if happens today? \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

Do you would support OP_CTV if happens today?

1959 sats \ 9 comments \ @Rsync25 24 Nov bitcoin

In a hypothetical scenario, if OP_CTV activation happens today, what you would do being a node runner?

Accept38.1%

Reject 19.0%

Neutral 42.9%

21 votes \ poll ended

view all related items

21 sats \ 5 replies \ @ek 24 Nov

I think as a node runner, you don't accept or reject a soft fork. You don't have to do anything except upgrade if you want to use OP_CTV in your transactions. If you don't upgrade, you can still follow the chain since it's a soft fork.

I think the question should be what miners would do if activation happens today. Would they mine blocks with OP_CTV codes (including on top of them) or reject them and split the chain?

Remember, for taproot, we used "Speedy Trial" and miners were signalling, not nodes:

BIP9 and Speedy Trial is a softfork deployment method where the miners and mining pools help to coordinate the deployment of a softfork. They do so by signalling for deployment of the softfork in their mined blocks. To lock in the softfork for activation, 90% of the blocks have to signal.

The signalling method works in periods of 2016 blocks, meaning that within a 2016 block period, 90%, or 1815 of the 2016 blocks have to signal for readiness.

74 sats \ 4 replies \ @Rsync25 OP 24 Nov

The last word are node runners, beyond miners. Both define ‘final consensus’. Have CUSF and others forms of soft forks, but this is a kind of thing for another discussion.

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @ek 24 Nov

Do you mean with "reject as a node runner" to upgrade my node to something that rejects blocks with OP_CTV in it and thus creates a hard fork? I think that's what bcashers did with their nodes but I am not sure. I wasn't around at that time.

21 sats \ 2 replies \ @Rsync25 OP 24 Nov

That’s the point I’m leveraging here. I wanna see what nodes would do in this hypothetical scenario.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 24 Nov

Okay, so "accept" means to do nothing? Isn't that the same as "neutral"?

Or "accept" = "upgrade node to version with OP_CTV" and "neutral" = "do nothing"?

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @Rsync25 OP 24 Nov

Yes! Second option.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @OriginalSize 24 Nov

I don't see how it does anything for me as a humble stacker so I reject.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Fabs 24 Nov

Bitcoin keeps blowing my mind in terms of complexity.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Roll 24 Nov

OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY (CTV) is a proposed new opcode that takes a commitment and requires any transaction executing the opcode to match the commitment in the following fields: its version, locktime, signature scripts, number of inputs, sequences, number of outputs, outputs, and the location of the input being spent within the spending transaction. This allows an output to specify how its funds may be spent—a design known in Bitcoin as a covenant.

https://bitcoinops.org/en/topics/op_checktemplateverify/