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 7D558D63 for ; Mon, 21 May 2018 14:21:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-it0-f48.google.com (mail-it0-f48.google.com [209.85.214.48]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8DE36F8 for ; Mon, 21 May 2018 14:21:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f48.google.com with SMTP id n64-v6so21224476itb.3 for ; Mon, 21 May 2018 07:21:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=blockstream.io; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=TDu/ecd9XutE8A8Oty9Vz+Ga/oXomJ9XjFjtc4LFhoY=; b=RmYnMcjjHkq+c+VT576M8kYnAVk6gxuknnRDmhpHRDpscsX1oL+Yczi0nyORDvrWmE AloQbqTtSrHgGynmOGdC+tdB+7mXzoB8UjlA5T11OLMw9cqVdgZ2nKs1MGTo7LSuPVCr pawQ2bBJuxa8gohyAXVdVjxJwC6KBTIh99XII= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=TDu/ecd9XutE8A8Oty9Vz+Ga/oXomJ9XjFjtc4LFhoY=; b=XLBVkFGF0MxNnsRiDY+6w/ABupj/9CbGsL7GmVRm/36iAYhqsdGXl85rEbC8rT7ZMC NPU2yqPWxU0lhmjmkrxwo7EBCXy32WOl+zmatpMXOLk6Nvgnk0w38Lil0nX1qpOb0B0h 09Ko/5xSIE4QZd2eyXqnYBD2rUugCReTEXful+oryynNoBykJWzVRkgsu2wOX4WiFSvi ZLhwVqJq8xbnjClfDLcDu7Y7E2xS7ZLVWDmm+2F3ISdBUGauO2t5psJFzeNO98YwYfW/ tZ6JN9cHZwd8OwPj52k5N1nHguXFc4uOSHUVvrDge3QF+/3elNnyM9RxzGyy2/Q2zpuV MZog== X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwdU21qpRBBZ7xB85VRsiFnD8xtjcP4dUlDC6qzHrwdoE8Zg0n1C rNGAI7dvsIT473je10DJFKHKusZ0RID5dHsBhb5e3A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZoIV4gam0/Qnn7hjxjuBLYN9perclD1U1SQGYrQtakLzlXQc0GOq0oh7uVfDFTcHbUWFOf40C9LjJfE+/xZ6Tc= X-Received: by 2002:a24:6f0e:: with SMTP id x14-v6mr17428660itb.38.1526912460055; Mon, 21 May 2018 07:21:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a02:1086:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 21 May 2018 07:20:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87zi0tisft.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> References: <87po25lmzs.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <201805100227.42217.luke@dashjr.org> <87vabnq9ui.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <87zi0tisft.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> From: "Russell O'Connor" Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 10:20:39 -0400 Message-ID: To: Rusty Russell , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c8fde6056cb80276" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE 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] Making OP_TRUE standard? X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 14:21:01 -0000 --000000000000c8fde6056cb80276 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" In the thread "Revisting BIP 125 RBF policy" @ https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2018-February/015717.html and https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2018-March/015797.html I propose replacing rule 3 with a rule that instead demands that the replacement package fee rate exceeds the package fee rate of the original transactions, and that there is an absolute fee bump of the particular transaction being replaced that covers the min-fee rate times the size of the mempool churn's data size. Perhaps this would address your issue too Rusty. On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 11:44 PM, Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Jim Posen writes: > > I believe OP_CSV with a relative locktime of 0 could be used to enforce > RBF > > on the spending tx? > > Marco points out that if the parent is RBF, this child inherits it, so > we're actually good here. > > However, Matt Corallo points out that you can block RBF will a > large-but-lowball tx, as BIP 125 points out: > > will be replaced by a new transaction...: > > 3. The replacement transaction pays an absolute fee of at least the sum > paid by the original transactions. > > I understand implementing a single mempool requires these kind of > up-front decisions on which tx is "better", but I wonder about the > consequences of dropping this heuristic? Peter? > > Thanks! > Rusty. > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > --000000000000c8fde6056cb80276 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In the thread "Revisting B= IP 125 RBF policy" @ https://lists.linuxfoundation.= org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2018-February/015717.html and https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2018-March/015797.= html I propose replacing rule 3 with a rule that instead demands that t= he replacement package fee rate exceeds the package fee rate of the origina= l transactions, and that there is an absolute fee bump of the particular tr= ansaction being replaced that covers the min-fee rate times the size of the= mempool churn's data size.

Per= haps this would address your issue too Rusty.

On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 11:44 PM, Rus= ty Russell via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfou= ndation.org> wrote:
Jim Posen <jim.posen@gmail.com> writes:
> I believe OP_CSV with a relative locktime of 0 could be used to enforc= e RBF
> on the spending tx?

Marco points out that if the parent is RBF, this child inherits it, = so
we're actually good here.

However, Matt Corallo points out that you can block RBF will a
large-but-lowball tx, as BIP 125 points out:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0will be replaced by a new transaction...:

=C2=A0 =C2=A03. The replacement transaction pays an absolute fee of at leas= t the sum
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 paid by the original transactions.

I understand implementing a single mempool requires these kind of
up-front decisions on which tx is "better", but I wonder about th= e
consequences of dropping this heuristic?=C2=A0 Peter?

Thanks!
Rusty.
_________= ______________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.= linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org= /mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

--000000000000c8fde6056cb80276--