LibraryConsensus2013Design paperCorpus record
Information Propagation in the Bitcoin Network
Bitcoin network. Christian Decker and Roger Wattenhofer.
Measure how Bitcoin announcements travel. The median time and the long tail are what set a safe block interval.
A reading of the public document. Not a copy of it, and not a claim about a later network that reused the name.
A throughput claim that ignores propagation is not about Bitcoin. Ask for the delay distribution the design assumes.
The five-minute read
The defect
Block interval and block size are arguments about forks only if you know how long a block actually takes to reach the network.
The rule
Measure how Bitcoin announcements travel. The median time and the long tail are what set a safe block interval.
How it is put together
Inventory messages announce a block before the body. The diameter of the network is an empirical fact, not a parameter in the white paper. A larger block moves the distribution.
Where the claim stops
The 2013 measurement is not the 2026 relay network.
One action, walked through
- Collect announcement times from many vantage points.
- Record the delay from first announcement to last honest node.
- Compare that delay with the block interval.
- What is the block interval relative to the propagation tail?
The argument, unpacked
Why it is still on the desk
A throughput claim that ignores propagation is not about Bitcoin. Ask for the delay distribution the design assumes.
After the text
Later relay networks exist because this measurement showed the gossip tail. Cite the paper for the method, not for a current median.
What has to be true
- The 2013 measurement is not the 2026 relay network.
- It does not justify a particular block size by itself.
- Compact blocks and FIBRE changed the tail.
What happened after the paper
Later relay networks exist because this measurement showed the gossip tail. Cite the paper for the method, not for a current median.
What to check before you use the idea
- What is the block interval relative to the propagation tail?
- Does the design assume compact blocks?
- Which year's network was measured?
Terms
- Inventory
- A short announcement that a block exists.
- Diameter
- The time for an announcement to reach the last honest node.
The problem the paper names
Block interval and block size are arguments about forks only if you know how long a block actually takes to reach the network.
What the design proposes
- Inventory messages announce a block before the body.
- The diameter of the network is an empirical fact, not a parameter in the white paper.
- A larger block moves the distribution.
How the mechanism is specified
- Collect announcement times from many vantage points.
- Record the delay from first announcement to last honest node.
- Compare that delay with the block interval.
What this page does not treat as proven
- The 2013 measurement is not the 2026 relay network.
- It does not justify a particular block size by itself.
- Compact blocks and FIBRE changed the tail.
Why a venture studio still reads it
A throughput claim that ignores propagation is not about Bitcoin. Ask for the delay distribution the design assumes.
This is Blockchain Lab's reading of a public design paper. It is not the paper, not a copy of it, and not an offer of tokens, equity, custody or a partnership. Later network behaviour can diverge from the text. Nothing here is investment, legal or technical advice.
Research status: Design paper. Last reviewed: 1 October 2026. This is a reading of a public paper, not investment, legal or security advice.