Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#1866
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
  • Hard fork through Bitcoin Cash which implemented a larger block size thereby making previously invalid block sizes valid.
  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  • Transaction malleability was solved by placing the Tx signature outside the Transaction Block.
  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
  • Lightning network uses SegWit and seeks to support smaller transactions off chain for transfer to the Bitcoin chain at sufficient size.
  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
  • No, this is a soft fork. A large number of nodes do not use Segwit.
1 Like
#1867
  1. Increasing the block size to 2 mb expanding a fork/community splitting hard fork called bitcoin cash.
  2. Transaction Malleability
  3. Segwit allows second layer protocols/solutions on the bitcoin blockchain, like lightning network. The lightning network allowing nodes to function without waiting on block confirmation from miners. The lightning network couldn’t work well enough without the fixing of the trransaction malleability issues solved by segwit.
  4. No, as it is a soft fork; although, there is a high incentive such as, lower transaction fees and quicker transaction times.
1 Like
#1868
  1. Increasing the Block Size.
  2. Transaction Malleabilty. A flaw in bitcoin code that enables anyone to make small changes to the trandaction Id and resultant hash without changing the contents.
    3.The development of Second Layer Protocols.
  3. No. Segwit is a Soft Fork.
1 Like
#1869

  1. What was a proposed alternative to SegWit?
    Increasing the block size to accommodate more transactions.

  2. What did SegWit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    The transaction malleability issue. SegWit removes the signature from the block that’s propagated through the nodes. The signature remains on the outside of the block if verification become necessary.

  3. How is SegWit and the Lightning network connected?
    SegWit supports second layer protocols. One such second layer protocol is the Lighting Network which boosts Bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking small transactions off the chain.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use SegWit?
    Well? Bitcoin experienced a hard fork because there were those who did not want anything to do with the SegWit solution. If, however, you are part of the original Bitcoin project then you have no choice but to use SegWit. Why would you not want to?

1 Like
#1870
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

It was proposed to increase the block size - but it would lead to a hard fork, though.

  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

It solved the issue of transaction malleability.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Lightning network must rely on unconfirmed transactions. This was a security issue with tx malleability in place. By solving tx malleability issue, segwit did make Lightning network feasible

  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?

No. Legacy data is compatible (it was a soft fork) and it all works even without segwit.

1 Like
#1871

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was an increase in the block size.

  2. Transaction malleability

  3. Segwit supports the development of second layer solutions, of which the Lightning network is one.

  4. No, it is optional at this stage.

1 Like
#1872

Technically you can still make non segwit transactions on Bitcoin as well :slight_smile: though its not recommended because you can save on fees quite a bit if you use segwit.

3 Likes
#1873

I alway use bech32 addresses, and when I move funds to my cold storage or consolidate utxo’s or something, I only set 1 sat/byte fee :sunglasses:
In de weekends, these transactions eventually get mined. and if you send to your self, it is not a disaster if the transaction gets lost. (most nodes only keep unconfirmed transactions for 2 weeks)
I also use RBF (bip 0125) so in case you really want it to go through, you can boost the fee’s up.

1 Like
#1874

  1. increasing the block size.

  2. it solved that there could be more transactions in one block tx mallebility, by removing the tx signature and makes a block less in size.

  3. segwit helps lightning network by allowing it to work on the second layer with low risk

  4. no it not forced because it is a soft fork.

1 Like
#1875
  • What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    A increased Block size (Bitcoincash)
  • What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It solved transaction maleability and gave the Blockchain a second layer solution
  • How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit enabled second layer solutions like lightning network
  • Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No it was/is a softfork
1 Like
#1876
  1. To increase Bitcoin block size
  2. It removed signatures from transactions, therefore signature change cannot influence the hash (transaction id). Solves tx maleability issue.
  3. Segwit made second layer solutions such as lightning network layer possible
  4. No, because it is a soft fork.
2 Likes
#1877
  1. What was the proposed alternative to segwit?
    Increase the block size from 1 mb to 2 mb.
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It prevented a hard fork and stopped tx’s malability by removing the signature’s from the tx input, creating a “block weight” capped at 4mb’s, while block size stayed at 1mb, compatable with previous protocal,
  3. How is Segwit and the lightning network connected?
    Segwit made a second layer protocol possible by taking frequent small tx’s offchain only settling on the Bitcoin blockchain when users are ready.
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, Segwit is a soft fork and compatable with original protocol.
1 Like
#1878
  1. Bigger block sizes.
  2. By solving Tx iD malleability.
  3. Segwit is the foundation for lighting network.
  4. No, it is compatible with old protocol. (softfork)
1 Like
#1879
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
  • An increase in the size of the block
  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  • It solved the issue of transaction malleability.
  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
  • They both describe proposed changes to bitcoin’s blockchain to allow for faster transactions.
  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
  • No
1 Like
#1880
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Hard fork, or block size making larger
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    it solves transaction malleability and makes fees goes lower
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    is it second layer solution
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    Still can be used old transactions
1 Like
#1881
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Separate the signature piece from the blockchain to make more space to store transactions.
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Improved the security risk from malleability.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit enables the lighting network
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, this creates a potential problem with older addresses not using Segwit.
1 Like
#1882

Not really, you can still use old style transactions and transfer funds from segwit addresses to legacy ones. :slight_smile:

1 Like
#1883

Thank you for the correction Alko89.

#1884
  1. A purposed alternative was a hard fork purposely to increase the Data size cap of a block in the chain.
  2. On top of reducing the data needed for each tx, hence increasing the amount of txs in a block, Segwit removed the signature from a tx’s data after a node verified the signature. This means that the tx id hash was the hash from all the pertinent info needed to send BTC from 1 address to another. Before, a signature could be changed by the receiver, hence changing the tax id, but still keeping the tx a valid tx. The sender wouldn’t be able to confirm that a tax was confirmed based on the original tx id number. Now if any info changes within a tx to change its tx id, it will be information that will nullify the transaction entirely.
  3. The Lightning Network works with regularly sent BTC transactions and tracks the transactions until parties are ready to officially send it on the BTC network. This compresses the amount of data needed to send the same amount of data over many txs into a smaller amount of txs. This reduces the amount of data hence reducing fees and utilizing space on the BTC network to be more efficient. The Lightning Network would not be possible to track and confirm txs if their ids could be changed after the fact through Transaction Malleability.
  4. Though Wallets, People, and other services aren’t forced to use Segwit to receive value because wallets, people, and other services that use Segwit would still be compatible within their protocols. However, you would need a Segwit updated wallet to send value to someone else that uses one. Theoretically, you can still send data using the signature data onto a block but it will cost you the usage in fees by using more data. The BTC network has standard adopted Segwit at this point.
1 Like
#1885

Q1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

A1. Increase the block size limit to 2MB.

Q2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

A2. Segwit also fixed the Transaction Malleability issue.

Q3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

A3. The Lightning network is a second layer protocol which increase bitcoin’s transaction capacity - i.e. taking frequent small transactions off-chain until arriving on the bitcoin blockchain when ready.

Q4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?

A4. No, and in fact adoption was really quite slow.

1 Like