Hi Mark and Clara,

Great research, thanks for it!

Few questions out of mind after a first read.

> This approach enables block building to consider Child Pays For Parent (CPFP) constellations.

I think that's a really interesting point, it's likely that such transaction graphs with multiple disjunctive branches become far more regular in the future. One can think about OP_CTV's style
congestion-tree, LN's splicing or chain of coinjoins. If this phenomenon happens, can you expect CSB feerate perf to improve ?

> CSB is more complex and requires more computation

Let's say a malicious miner identifies and connects to its competitors' mempools then starts to broadcast to them hard-to-traverse CPFP constellations. Doing so, this malicious miner would prevent them either from assembling block templates at all or slow down their assemblage computation enough to gain an advantage in fee collection. Following current mempools limits, it would be relevant to know by how much CSB makes that kind of DoS possible/efficient.

> From the point of view of global blockspace demand, if miners generally became DPFA-sensitive,
it could encourage creation of additional transactions for the sole purpose of bumping stuck ancestors.

As ASB's ancestor set and CSB's candidate set, a fee bidder, we'll have to pay the feerate to cover the new transaction fields, high enough to catch up with the already-present feerate set ? Likely more feerate efficient to RBF the first child, though you have to swallow the replacement feerate penalty (default 1 sat/vbyte iirc)

Antoine