RE: Alt Market Strong; Maximalism WRong
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
I don't understand how implementing RC pools is a soft fork
I don't think resource credits are actually part of consensus at all, so any changes to it are a soft fork. It's just that all of the witness nodes enforce them and won't let transactions into a block unless the account has enough RC. If you run a witness node and disable resource credits then you should be able to include transactions into a block from accounts that don't have enough RC for those transactions and it will still be considered a valid block and valid transactions. The idea is that if you are doing this then you would presumably lose witness votes and not be able to make many more blocks.
0
0
0.000
The other witnesses would flag this block as a bad-block and reverse it I assume,
which again leads to a scenario of losing witness votes.
But again if this was the case that means the witness is breaking consensus.
So I'm still curious as to how this actually works.
Considering what happened when we booted up RCs I have to assume you're correct.
We all had negative RCs which would have been impossible with hard-enforced consensus.
No, since RCs are not part of consensus, this would be a perfectly valid block and would be included on the blockchain just like any other block. It really wouldn't create much of a problem either, the block size is limited anyway so at worst some accounts would be able to get in some more transactions than they normally would have been able to in any blocks created by that witness - which is a function of the amount of witness votes they have.
interesting and good to know.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Witnesses can reject a consensus-valid block if they want, and it's still a soft fork. From a consensus perspective it looks the same as the situation where a block is received too late due to network delays and gets ignored.
The only thing witnesses can't do with a soft fork is accept a consensus-invalid block.