NU7 Sentiment Polling and ZIP Submission Window

[aquietinvestor]

To follow up on my post from yesterday evening:

@daira

What is your general sentiment toward reducing the complexity and attack surface of the Zcash protocol by disallowing v4 transactions? (This would disable the ability to spend Sprout funds, for which there will be no wallet support in any case after the prior deprecation of zcashd.)

We are okay making this change.

@daira

This reflects the fact that in the ZIP Editors’ initial viability assessment of NU7 proposals, we were significantly more negative toward ZIP 235 than toward ZIPs 233 and 234. For the former we were “Inclined toward no; based on a combination of Safety and Usefulness issues, there is insufficient reason in our opinion to make this change in an otherwise heavy upgrade.” due primarily to limited benefit: “The amount involved is very low (as calculated in the ZIP), and so the rationale points given in the ZIP imply limited benefit in the short-term.”

We will split the NSM into two separate questions, but I wanted to respond to your comment.

I understand your concern about usefulness. However, while fees are small today, that won’t necessarily always be the case. They can change quickly as usage and demand evolve. From our perspective, it’s easier to introduce ZIP 235 before fees become meaningful, rather than waiting until there are stronger incentives to resist it.

Moreover, as I’ve mentioned to you before, implementing the NSM now with ZIP 235 also has the benefit of shaping behavior and market dynamics. Confidence in the network’s long-term sustainability is itself a meaningful economic signal, and having that mechanism clearly defined at the protocol level could matter to users and investors who are concerned about Bitcoin’s unresolved security budget issue.

Also, whether this ends up being a “heavy upgrade” depends in part on the outcome of this polling. If there is limited support for certain proposals, they may not move forward at all, which would naturally reduce the scope and complexity of the upgrade.

Here are the two questions:

2. What is your general sentiment toward adding protocol support for the Network Sustainability Mechanism (NSM), including smoothing the issuance curve, which allows ZEC to be removed from circulation and later reissued as future block rewards to help sustain network security while preserving the 21 million ZEC supply cap?

3. What is your general sentiment toward burning 60% of transaction fees via the Network Sustainability Mechanism (NSM)? The goals are to prevent miners from manipulating fees, to demonstrate Zcash’s commitment to long-term sustainability, and to burn ZEC so that it can be re-issued in the future without exceeding the 21M supply cap.