
If anyone can see a mistake in the above chart, please let me know. I'd like to post it to r/bitcoin once I'm confident it's correct.
Another great chart Peter.
One suggestion. Is it worth mentioning IBLT because by the time 16MB blocks are being mined they will likely be taking up just 500KB of bandwidth overhead to propagate. Obviously the real-time unconfirmed transaction overhead does remain. and is large long-term.
Just as during the 1MB debate so many people kept confusing the block size limit as the average block size, so is the case with Gavin's doubling schedule. These big block sizes are
disk block sizes, the bandwidth-using blocks will be far smaller.
Full blocks will only need to be sent between nodes on resync and bootstrapping, not a normal state for most nodes. Even then, future Bitsat-type blockchain download services should mean that nodes catching up have a faster option than relying on terrestrial broadband.