Welcome to the Dash Forum!

Please sign up to discuss the most innovative cryptocurrency!

Introducing Dash Improvement Proposals, starting with 2MB Block implementation

Discussion in 'Official Announcements' started by AndyDark, Jul 14, 2017.

  1. AndyDark

    AndyDark Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2014
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    676
    Trophy Points:
    163
    Hi everyone,

    I'm pleased to announce the publication of our first Dash Improvement Proposal, aka DIP, related to the initial scaling of the network to 2MB blocks that was agreed by a network vote last year:

    https://github.com/dashpay/dips/blob/master/dip-0001.md

    Modelled on the Bitcoin BIPs, we will follow a similar process and start to publish key future changes to Dash as DIPs to enable public peer review prior to implementation.

    This is part of our transition to a more open and academic research & development process and we currently have a further 9 DIPs in draft form being prepared covering much of the Evolution architecture that we will publish over the coming months.

    DIP 001 was authored by Darren Tap, who joined the Core Team recently. Darren earned his Ph.D. in 2007 studying Algebraic Geometry under Uli Walther at Purdue University. Since graduation he has taught mathematics at several colleges and universities, provided database guidance to a middle size company, and has been studying bitcoin since 2011.

    Other core developers who contributed directly to DIP 001 are UdjinM6, Timothy Flynn, Ilya Savinov, Will Wray and Nathan Marley.

    DIP 001 development is currently in progress for planned release in an update in early September.

    @nmarley who led Sentinel development and is now an Evolution team lead will manage the DIP repository going forward.

    Best,
    Andy Freer
     
    • Like x 19
    • Winner x 6
    • Informative x 2
    • Agree x 1
    • Useful x 1
  2. thephez

    thephez Member
    Dash Core Team

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2016
    Messages:
    74
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Great news! I'm glad to see a formal process for publicly tracking things like this. Thanks for the update.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. solarguy

    solarguy Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2017
    Messages:
    716
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Excellent. Carry on.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. Stealth923

    Stealth923 Well-known Member
    Foundation Member Masternode Owner/Operator

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2014
    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    331
    Trophy Points:
    233
    Dash has just entered a new era of maturity. Carry on :)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  5. CaptAhab

    CaptAhab Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2015
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    68
    Dash Address:
    XwUeFiUQz1qLurzcpzKBDUTPvj1Tzx3FYs
    This is excellent news .:)
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. mulga

    mulga Active Member
    Foundation Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2014
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Great news!
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. camosoul

    camosoul Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    1,082
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Does this mean I'm getting banned?
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
  8. qwerty2002

    qwerty2002 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2017
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Good call. I am glad you didn't meet with them.
     
  9. demo

    demo Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2016
    Messages:
    3,046
    Likes Received:
    214
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Dash Address:
    XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
    I dont like the way you describe your DIP.

    Your talk is not accurate. What is a moderate CPU? Is a moderate CPU of today also a moderate CPU of tomorrow? Could you please use computational theory ( or parameterized complexity) terms? You should describe the problem using this theory, in order to get rid of the inaccurate "nowdays moderate CPU" concept.

    Scaling the block size is a timeless problem, and as such it should be described. Dont use initial values (3 minutes to verify, 12 minutes to verify) as arguments. Try to describe the problem by seting these initial values as variables . So that if in the future the "3 minute to verify" becomes "1 second to verify" or "3 hours to verify", you can reconsider your decision.

    Ok, now you are using parameterized complexity terms.
    But could you please give us a url that points and analyzes your argument.
    How comes and this is a quadratic attack. Who said that, where, and how this quadratic term has been proved?

    You are falling again into the "nowdays moderate CPU" pit. 100kb and 2 seconds for what kind of CPU? Is there an analysis about 200kb? For 200kb, how many seconds, and in what kind of CPU?
     
    #9 demo, Jul 25, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2017
  10. demo

    demo Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2016
    Messages:
    3,046
    Likes Received:
    214
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Dash Address:
    XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
    meet who?:p
     
  11. ottokoester

    ottokoester New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2017
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Hi Andy,

    Sorry but I did not understand the explanation of "Quadratic Hashing Challenge" very well.
    What does a mean, when you say:

    "Paradoxically, this attack could get so bad that it becomes impossible because propagation would force an attacking block to be orphaned. Even if an attacking block is not included in the main chain, trying to verify attacking blocks can have negative transient effects."

    About this:

    As such it can’t treat the sample of masternodes as a simple random sample. At current time 4032 masternodes would consist of a sample of around 87% of masternodes. This number is small enough that the sample of masternodes are unique. If this number were larger then there would be a chance that some masternodes would be sampled twice while others aren’t sampled at all. This property is maintained as long as the number of blocks in a round is under 90% of all masternodes. The number 4032 also has the property of being equal to about a week of blocks.

    I think this is the master key of the proof! The question is: In case that nothing is permanently and no far away, many things will change (or better, are changing), how it's possible achieve accuracy if the reality of (small)miners are not the same of the reality of the (big)masternodes. We are talking about new machines, new GH/S operators and, based on BIP 009 Process, how can I determine, as a miner, when it's the "Expected activation conditions" Or how can I discover, in fact that I'm not a representative miner, by myself.

    Sorry, could you explain this with more details.
    I really appreciate your job! Thanks in advance.

    Thanks @demo !!!
     
  12. abha

    abha New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2018
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    its help
     

Share This Page