[bisq-network/proposals] BSQ/DAO oracle (#33)

[Manfred Karrer]

Re hard coded parameters: 
Yes for some cases soft forks might work but if it could render some BSQ invalid (e.g. changing the voting fee to a higher value (we could be tolerant if the paid fee is higher as expected from the params) would invalidate a vote and therefore can lead to a different result in issuance. Not all such cases will lead to a different state of BSQ (e.g. if the vote would not have influenced the total vote result) but we don't know in advance.
For proposals and voting we can enforce that users have to be on the latest version (we use version bytes in all important data). But to enforce passive BSQ users who only use it for paying trading fee or trading it on the market it a bit harder. If a hard fork is needed we can signal that to users. We will probably have a consensus check built in anyway so if a users has a different state then the majority of full nodes he will get alerted by sending out requests for a hash chain of the BSQ state and compare the responses with own state. We can create a hash of the BSQ state data at each block and use the previous hash to create a new consensus hash. This one will be then used for the next - similar like the BTC blocks are chained by referring to the last blocks hash. 

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/33#issuecomment-407778876
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20180725/5e6bf52b/attachment-0001.html>