SegWit forked unexpectedly on testnet

[arnoudk]

SegWit is a very complex change to bitcoin. If it is implemented without proper testing, bad things can happen.

Of course SegWit is still in development right now, so it would not be fair to judge it too harshly... but it did just fork unexpectedly on their testnet:


This just shows how COMPLEX a change is being implemented, while a SIMPLE 2MB block size solution is available right now.

[source]

[mably]

It looks like it has been answered today on #segwit-dev IRC channel:

22:08:05 <instagibbs> hey you guys are famous: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/commen ... n_testnet/
22:08:18 <instagibbs> if the reasoning is conclusively verified, might be a good idea to send the word out
22:26:32 <cfields> sipa/morcos/CodeShark: as suggested by jl2012, I added the sigops-counting change to my old/busted segwit node, and verified that reconsiderblock is now happy with the forking block.
22:26:41 <cfields> instagibbs: heh, nice timing
22:27:45 <cfields> reason identified, not a problem.
22:29:06 <sipa> great

[arnoudk]

Some more discussion is going on here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4 ... n_testnet/

[rogerver]

Thanks for sharing this and being such a great member of forum.bitcoin.com

[LiteCoinGuy]

one more reason to add 2 MB blocks FIRST to win some time. most people say this since years

[arnoudk]

one more reason to add 2 MB blocks FIRST to win some time. most people say this since years

Exactly.

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

one more reason to add 2 MB blocks FIRST to win some time. most people say this since years

Exactly.

.

[arnoudk]

.QED