Peter Conrad

Even if this does not change consensus it would be a good idea to publish a spec in the form of a BSIP. See https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/pull/116#pullrequestreview-190793846 .

The biggest problem I see with the OP is that this would mean that the fee required for an operation can (and will) change very frequently. This means it is...

IMO the id need not be unique. Certainly not globally, but also not per user. I can imagine use-cases where users would want to set the same ID for different...

> If uniqueness is not enforced, it would be complex to define behaviors of operations which update the objects by that ID. Not necessarily. E. g. for `limit_order_cancel` it would...

A sharedrop on BTS could easily lead to more than 1 million write operations in the database. This cannot be done during normal block processing. Please modify the spec so...

Publishing version information is a security risk. A witness who is running his nodes without following the usual witness communication channels, or monitoring github releases, deserves to be fired. Which...

P2P layer is not relevant here, because the proposal is to publish version information in the block header, which is publicly visible to everybody. Witness node connectivity mitigates the risk...

> And how about only putting major on chain? `major` version has been `2` since 2015. You'd have to define a versioning scheme first, to get something useful out of...

> I am baffled by such resistance to this idea. It seems to be driven either by 1) irrational fear of an un-quantified, potential threat, or 2) a rational fear...

Just because many applications are publishing version info that doesn't mean it's a good idea. Any how-to about server hardening will advise you to disable this whereever possible. I'm saying...