From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57E23BDE for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 18:23:19 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-qg0-f44.google.com (mail-qg0-f44.google.com [209.85.192.44]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22E44138 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 18:23:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qgeg89 with SMTP id g89so7961161qge.3 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:23:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SkWfnWp4c+cl5+yG3wNS/eYhE+NTIDFqvTZr7GF5kAk=; b=msm/4vIySeZWHgCXm19Hr19UXzUzh5M5uY6oztn0XmE4IeNDCM/1lugdF3Bl43ODlh 5Ahz1HFCFCwIjiFktjyJN3epp6WfB0GrQukT9MSwlu8Us+joVl8mCKSfFGTigDQdGBHm 1lP37CJe8rofTRWSD8UxAAT7MH0H0ufWscobzRLfCLORjQaP9bVIpLpNMzpbWhjw4FRF i0u6j3QPQ4G9vXNLtEAEHG7VGfmvifJC8z9f8d/IWPCPWF41BOmCsnDQET33i4aN/D5g S42ClDtgFlQIVuLlhOq5rIIv5GC3IkqTRoguBicsPZjpgWPvl6flefoc218zKT4jQBOk MTLQ== X-Received: by 10.140.109.119 with SMTP id k110mr27639379qgf.53.1435688597446; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:23:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:18d:8301:36e:89a9:a6f3:1a88:57a6? ([2601:18d:8301:36e:89a9:a6f3:1a88:57a6]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 6sm320705qks.37.2015.06.30.11.23.16 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:23:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5592DE93.1070002@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 14:23:15 -0400 From: Chris Pacia User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org References: <20150629050726.GA502@savin.petertodd.org> <5591E10F.9000008@thinlink.com> <20150630013736.GA11508@savin.petertodd.org> <20150630160523.GG17984@savin.petertodd.org> In-Reply-To: <20150630160523.GG17984@savin.petertodd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP: Full Replace-by-Fee deployment schedule X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 18:23:19 -0000 On 06/30/2015 12:05 PM, Peter Todd wrote: > Well, as you know I have good reason to believe those contracts are > being actively worked on right now. Isn't the whole reason they are working on those contracts because a few miners don't use first-seen in all circumstances as it is? Or as a corollary, wouldn't full RBF just create that much more incentive for those type of contracts?