public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: [bitcoin-dev] Removing the Dust Limit
@ 2021-08-09 10:25 Prayank
  2021-08-09 11:58 ` Karl
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Prayank @ 2021-08-09 10:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: lf-lists; +Cc: Bitcoin Dev, lightning-dev

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 856 bytes --]

> As feerates have gone up over time, and as we expect them to go up further, we should be considering drastically increasing the 3 sat/vByte basis to something more like 20 sat/vB.

I have no opinion on changing or removing dust limit. However, fee rates are not going up. Yes, we expect them to go up and miners revenue from fees as well. Although, fees/day (in terms of BTC) has been decreasing in each cycle. Fee rates have been ranging between 1 sat/vByte to 200-300 sat/vByte, regularly reset to 1-5 sat/vByte and very low since long time now except when hash rate went down.

Fees per MB since 2016: https://i.imgur.com/XEkkf99.png 

Highest in this cycle on April 19 2021: 2.5 BTC
Highest in previous cycle on December 18 2017: 10 BTC

It stays low all the time except few days in each cycle.

-- 
Prayank
 
A3B1 E430 2298 178F


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3711 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [bitcoin-dev] Removing the Dust Limit
@ 2022-03-12 13:02 vjudeu
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: vjudeu @ 2022-03-12 13:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jeremy, lightning-dev, Bitcoin development mailing list

> We should remove the dust limit from Bitcoin.

Any node operator can do that. Just put "dustrelayfee=0.00000000" in your bitcoin.conf.

And there is more: you can also conditionally allow free transactions:

mintxfee=0.00000001
minrelaytxfee=0.00000000
blockmintxfee=0.00000000

Then, when using getblocktemplate you will get transactions with the highest fees first anyway, and you include cheap or free transactions in the end, if there will be enough room for them.

So, all of those settings are in the hands of node operators, there is no need to change the source code, all you need is to convince nodes to change their settings.


On 2021-08-08 20:53:28 user Jeremy via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
We should remove the dust limit from Bitcoin. Five reasons:


1) it's not our business what outputs people want to create
2) dust outputs can be used in various authentication/delegation smart contracts
3) dust sized htlcs in lightning (https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/46730/can-you-send-amounts-that-would-typically-be-considered-dust-through-the-light) force channels to operate in a semi-trusted mode which has implications (AFAIU) for the regulatory classification of channels in various jurisdictions; agnostic treatment of fund transfers would simplify this (like getting a 0.01 cent dividend check in the mail)
4) thinly divisible colored coin protocols might make use of sats as value markers for transactions.
5) should we ever do confidential transactions we can't prevent it without compromising privacy / allowed transfers


The main reasons I'm aware of not allow dust creation is that:


1) dust is spam
2) dust fingerprinting attacks


1 is (IMO) not valid given the 5 reasons above, and 2 is preventable by well behaved wallets to not redeem outputs that cost more in fees than they are worth.


cheers,


jeremy




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [bitcoin-dev] Removing the Dust Limit
@ 2021-08-08 18:52 Jeremy
  2021-08-08 21:14 ` Matt Corallo
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jeremy @ 2021-08-08 18:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: lightning-dev, Bitcoin development mailing list

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1221 bytes --]

We should remove the dust limit from Bitcoin. Five reasons:

1) it's not our business what outputs people want to create
2) dust outputs can be used in various authentication/delegation smart
contracts
3) dust sized htlcs in lightning (
https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/46730/can-you-send-amounts-that-would-typically-be-considered-dust-through-the-light)
force channels to operate in a semi-trusted mode which has implications
(AFAIU) for the regulatory classification of channels in various
jurisdictions; agnostic treatment of fund transfers would simplify this
(like getting a 0.01 cent dividend check in the mail)
4) thinly divisible colored coin protocols might make use of sats as value
markers for transactions.
5) should we ever do confidential transactions we can't prevent it without
compromising privacy / allowed transfers

The main reasons I'm aware of not allow dust creation is that:

1) dust is spam
2) dust fingerprinting attacks

1 is (IMO) not valid given the 5 reasons above, and 2 is preventable by
well behaved wallets to not redeem outputs that cost more in fees than they
are worth.

cheers,

jeremy

--
@JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
<https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3569 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2022-03-12 13:02 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-08-09 10:25 [bitcoin-dev] Removing the Dust Limit Prayank
2021-08-09 11:58 ` Karl
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-03-12 13:02 vjudeu
2021-08-08 18:52 Jeremy
2021-08-08 21:14 ` Matt Corallo
2021-08-08 21:41   ` Oleg Andreev

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox