Update with BIP assignments

Update deployment methodology

bip-0113.mediawiki

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 <pre>
-  BIP: XX
+  BIP: 113
   Title: Median time-past as endpoint for lock-time calculations
   Author: Thomas Kerin <me@thomaskerin.io>
           Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org>	
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ miners to claim more transaction fees by lying about the timestamps of
 their block.
 
 This proposal seeks to ensure reliable behaviour in locktime calculations as 
-required by BIP65, BIP68, and BIPXX (OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY).
+required by BIP65 (CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY), BIP68, and BIP112 (CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY).
 
 
 ==Specification==
@@ -72,16 +72,33 @@ https://github.com/maaku/bitcoin/tree/medianpasttimelock
 
 ==Deployment==
 
-We reuse the double-threshold switchover mechanism from BIPs 34 and 66, with the 
+We reuse the double-threshold switchover mechanism from BIPs 34 and
-same thresholds, but for block.nVersion = 4. The new rules are in effect for 
+66, with the same thresholds, but for nVersion = 8. The new rules are
-every block (at height H) with nVersion = 4 and at least 750 out of 1000 blocks 
+in effect for every block (at height H) with nVersion = 8 and at least
-preceding it (with heights H-1000...H-1) also have nVersion = 4. Furthermore, 
+750 out of 1000 blocks preceding it (with heights H-1000..H-1) also
-when 950 out of the 1000 blocks preceding a block do have nVersion = 4, 
+have nVersion = 8. Furthermore, when 950 out of the 1000 blocks
-nVersion = 3 blocks become invalid, and all further blocks enforce the new rules.
+preceding a block do have nVersion = 8, nVersion = 3 blocks become
+invalid, and all further blocks enforce the new rules.
+
+When assessing the block version as mask of ~0x20000007 must be applied
+to work around the complications caused by
+[http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010396.html BIP101's premature use]
+of the [https://gist.github.com/sipa/bf69659f43e763540550 undecided version bits proposal].
+
+By applying ~0x20000007 with nVersion = 8, the thresholds should be tested
+comparing block nVersion >= 4 as this will save a bit for future use.
 
 It is recommended that this soft-fork deployment trigger include other related 
-proposals for improving Bitcoin's lock-time capabilities, such as BIP 65, BIP68
+proposals for improving Bitcoin's lock-time capabilities, including:
-and CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY.
+
+[https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0065.mediawiki BIP 65]: 
+CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY, 
+
+[https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0068.mediawiki BIP 68]: 
+Consensus-enforced transaction replacement signalled via sequence numbers,
+
+and [https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0112.mediawiki BIP 112]: 
+CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY.
 
 
 ==Acknowledgements==
@@ -89,6 +106,9 @@ and CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY.
 Mark Friedenbach for designing and authoring the reference
 implementation of this BIP.
 
+Thanks go to Gregory Maxwell who came up with the original idea,
+in #bitcoin-wizards on 2013-07-16.
+
 Thomas Kerin authored this BIP document.
 
 
@@ -105,7 +125,11 @@ concerns with existing protocols.
 
 [https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0068.mediawiki BIP68: Consensus-enforced transaction replacement signaled via sequence numbers]
 
-[https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-00.mediawiki BIPXX: CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY]
+[https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0112.mediawiki BIP112: CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY]
+
+[http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010396.html Softfork deployment considerations]
+
+[https://gist.github.com/sipa/bf69659f43e763540550 Version bits]
 
 
 ==Copyright==