Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#282

A soft fork means a change of certain rules if I undestand this correctly.
Now segwit came as a solution to keep the 1MB rule in its place (i.e no change of rules here) so I’m seeking for the change in the rules which made segwit to be referred to as soft fork. For obviously Its not in the size of the block I might think maybe it is in moving the sign info out. Is that to be considered a change of the rules?

#283

Yes I just searched about lightning network and got a better idea of what it is. Sigwit enables the lightning network by fixing the malleablity problem. Lightning Network was not in the curriculum if im not mistaken?

-------- Original-Nachricht --------

1 Like
#284

  1. Increase of block size

  2. Removes possible transaction malleability

  3. SegWit makes layer 2 solutions possible, like Lightning Network

  4. No (soft fork)

1 Like
#285

  1. Increasing the block size.

  2. Transaction ID malleability.

  3. The introduction of Segwit makes accepting unconfirmed transactions less risky which enables second layer protocols such as the Lightning network that build on top of the Bitcoin protocol.

  4. No Segwit adoption is optional because it is a soft fork so it is still compatible with the old protocol.

1 Like
#286
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increase the block size to 2Mb
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    malleability
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Via the second layer
    4 Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, since it is like a soft fork
2 Likes
#287
  1. The alternative proposed to SegWit was the increase in the BTC block size. BTC community denied it saying that it would have only postponed the problem. This divertion of opinions gave birth to BitcoinCash.
  2. Removing the signature (witness) from the transaction ID, not only more space was allowed in each block ensuring more transactions to be confirmed every second (3 to 7), the transaction malleability was also solved. Infact, people could change the transaction ScriptSig within a transaction ID resulting in a different hash function. This change did not corrupt the input and output but made it impossible to find the original transaction ID within the blockchain.
  3. SegWit update, making unconfirmed transaction less risky, also allowed second layer protocols to be implemented. The Lightning Network is such a second layer that allows to take frequent, small transactions off-chain setting them on BTC only when ready.
  4. No, Bitcoin Blockchain was never hard forked, SegWit was a Soft Fork which nodes, people and all other parties to BTC are free to adopt or not.
1 Like
#288

  1. Increasing the block size to 2mb

  2. It puts an end to transaction malleability but removing the signature or the witness information from the block and instead have it tandem to it from the “outside,” which also free’s up a lot of space on the block for more transactions

  3. Segwit is the reason there is a second layer to the blockchain for the Lightning Network to operate on while still being compatible with the first layer

  4. No one on the bitcoin blockchain are to use Segwit because it’s backwards compatible with the old system of having signatures inside the block making it a soft fork

1 Like
#289

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    One alternative proposal to Segwit was the icrease of the block size limit to 2MB. But increasing the block size limit is supposed to be a temporary solution, because increasing it over and over again would lead to other problems. If you increase the block size limit, it could become a burden to the network, because larger blocks would cause a higher network traffic. If a miner finds a block, the block will be propagated to the nodes of the bitcoin network. Due to the increased block size limit you would have an increased propagation time of this block in the network. This will increase the probability that another miner, which did not receive the new block yet, will find its own block and this block will also be propageted to the network. This temporary fork will lead to stale blocks, which can be considered as a waste of electricity, because a miner of a stale block will not receive any rewards. Although one can not prevent stale blocks at all, changes to the network, which lead to a higher number of stale blocks, should not be a preferable solution.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Segwit also solved the malleability issue of the bitcoin network. This flaw allowed a user to change small details of a transaction, but not its content. For example sending 01.0 BTC instead of 1.0 BTC. The leading 0 does not change the content at all, but it will change the transaction ID and the subsequent hash. Segwit solved the malleability problem by removing the signature from the base transaction block. With Segwit signatures and scripts can be changed without affecting the transaction id. This also enabled the development of more complex features such as second-layer protocols and smart contracts. Due to the removal of the signature information, transactions became slimmer and therefore more transactions could be included into one block (scaling issue).

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Since the lightning network is also a second layer protocol, the Segwit update enabled the development of it. The malleability fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    Since the SegWit upgrade is compatible with the previous protocol and the block size of 1MB did not change, you are not forced to use Segwit. At first the adoption had been very slow, because quite a bit development work had to be done to enable Segwit transactions. However in early 2020 the percentage of Segwit transactions is around 50%. For details please refer to https://segwit.space/.

2 Likes
#290

To raise the block size to 2GB.

Malleability. The issue of someone would be able to change the signature of a transaction, and by this, changing the transaction ID.

By Segwit solving Malleability issue, Lightning network can be implemented.

No. This was a soft fork on the bitcoin network. Most likely eventually, all nodes will update to it.

1 Like
#291

1, Increasing block size.
2, Transaction ID malleability.
3, Segwit helped on second layer of blockchain.
4, No it was choice.

1 Like
#292

  1. Increasing BTC block size to 2mb per block.

  2. SegWit solved also the malleability issue.

  3. No there are not forced but using SegWit will degrees tx fees. Thats a strong argument to use SegWit.

2 Likes
#293

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increasing the Block size from 1 Mb to 2 Mb.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
The Segwit also solved the Transaction Malleability Bug.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
By fixing the TX Malleability, it is now secure to “fund” the Chanel between multiple users that is being build on the Lighting Network. On that “channel” the final TX will be created and be sent to the Nodes in order to be validated and added to the Blockchain. This is possible by separating the Signature out of the TX.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
I don’t think they are forced, but it is recommended.

1 Like
#294

  1. A proposed alternative to segwit was to increase the block size.

  2. It solved transaction malleability, before Segwit the signature of a transaction could be changed, therefore changing the hash and Transaction ID. Now that the signature is apart from the transaction the hash cant be changed by changing the signature.

  3. Segwit and Lightning network are connected in that Segwit supported the development of Lightning, because by fixing transaction malleability there was the ability to create a faster second layer.

  4. People, wallets and other services are not forced to use Segwit since it is a soft fork, meaning that old transactions can still work.

1 Like
#295

  1. An increase in block size.

  2. Segwit also solved the TX ID malleability and enabled the development of secondary protocols on top of the bitcoin blockchain, that were previously not possible such as lightning, MAST, Schnorr Signatures, TumbleBit and more.

  3. Segwit enabled lightning, because the malleability fix makes features that rely on unconfirmed TXs less risky and easier to code.

  4. No, because Segwit is a soft fork.

1 Like
#296
  1. Increasing block size
  2. Malleability issue
  3. Implementing Segwit allowed second layer solutions such as Lightning network to be built
  4. No, it is a soft fork
1 Like
#297

What was a proposed alternative to SegWit?
The proposed alternative is increase the block size limit.

What did SegWit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It solves the transaction malleability, where anyone can make small changes in the signature of the transaction, which changes the transaction ID.

How is SegWit and the Lightning network connected?
The purpose of Lightning network is to move a lot of small transaction off-chain and only settling the result in one transaction on-chain. A flaw such as transaction malleability is very risky and takes longer to develop Lightning network.

Are people, wallets and other services forced to use SegWit?
No they are not forced to use SegWit but it is beneficial for people to use SegWit.
SegWit decreases transaction size and therefore decreases the transaction fees.

2 Likes
#298

Answers:

  1. Bigger Block size 2mb
  2. Transaction Malleability, which is changing a tx after hash has been sent.
  3. Because segwit supports second layer protocol.
  4. No they are not forced to use segwit but if they do it will make their transactions faster and cost less.
1 Like
#299
  • What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
  1. A hard fork with a larger block size. 1mB—2mB.
  • What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  1. Segwit solved the malleability issue which then allowed more throughput by having emptier blocks with the tx signatures placed outside the block.
  • How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
  1. Lighting, a second layer protocol that takes many smaller tx’s off chain until users are ready to settle their tx’s on bitcoin’s chain. Segwit helped further the lightning development on bitcoin.
  • Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
  1. No, Segwit was not a hard fork that required 100% network upgrade. Many wallets and companies upgraded at their own pace after.
1 Like
#300

Answers

  1. Increase the block size from 1 MB to 2 or more MB.

  2. Tx malleability, thus to support second layer solution.

  3. Lightning network is based on unconfirmed transaction. Segwit solved the malleability issues of transactions, so now it’s more secure to project second layer solution off-chain.

  4. No, it’s just a soft fork. The block size limit for the base transactions remains at 1MB. Full node that wants to store signature data needs to add “block weight”.

1 Like
#301

  • What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Block size increase

  • What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Transaction Malleability

  • How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    segwit increase the security and enables second layer solutions

  • Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    no, it was a soft fork

1 Like