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 255B0D28 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 19:58:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-wm0-f44.google.com (mail-wm0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A5A5628 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 19:58:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f44.google.com with SMTP id l16so2098493wmh.2 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:58:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0dqCu9PYcd98YXYYWjl4jyzcb8BcCabLkoxDuGSrXqA=; b=DgLLEBnYBxycAW5k2W74rPcS/39hm/SffA9USn4yRpRfI6Tw0kUKIz5Zedlu6x+yqT tG7hHUrxhcmu7ytZ6X3UiCKNiaqgwZ1fHIGgEsZ3h+wxDVx/PLf/pOg/PWcEbNSFXU1M QRDwguJa/WtMkIRrZV3ESe44xEhUxifzwBMTnnfEmll18HbaFpQB+rEWw/1HMD3Egxku XAA1hGIL/uPusuvJZHdA6vzOYvQShVU4K5M3e8JUuhvIszJ2rCQWhoUWxq4jm0PdGA6a AmswuYK7h1zFqJZ0ClpLTccrVjD7M0jLqRWHpqUrdDbf/tUeBUJcbp9BCJK5vK2Cuym7 ObCw== 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:cc; bh=0dqCu9PYcd98YXYYWjl4jyzcb8BcCabLkoxDuGSrXqA=; b=Y55ihkX3d3GakrF4//S8wz+qu7Ywpf8sVLcL5TYvaC637CFFY7HLchvgvtdQG9DJp1 ztVNTKDmGjcMFmOJ7JT/axF0tmWJ2ssHzmTVOU7JMXSMMbe4wUJy2VuXoMqXE7py/rxf LVnr7sQac41fmrE0Tq84/tUHf4+CVNuaVPle3EpgIEpN0s0EfCP3AtsyydicMBa8303f 8yqFu8WzTG/cnNxuovcCG/KEaD6XqsSARq2K4ajVt4Hf7yjY1T/AtDctRbhpiHRiYCbd VMhdbpNUuJdJROeTHQ0VINs+Wn2r9hQofXEzFrMqHT1Q94BQKS1ZOJ5KzYWxXtPi0Hzg 6wyw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tC0ngPQLnOf2ZqAjA8dtiKbjoz/FgTeXnDP1ttpEUpVN3Rar6Wd biHRG4RQ3YxdZYCySZcGctYgyWtefcwHUoz5MZ0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4/hE6LbVpRZblweZjnH9DyZq9J8TjpXfJdalqnQnVIQzkEWzRGdITpddL3qY2ArJX7AjPiITcRouq6Fgl+nbbs= X-Received: by 10.28.27.194 with SMTP id b185mr3847966wmb.57.1523476726525; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:58:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.152.83 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:58:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20180411075225.GG20665@savin.petertodd.org> <20180411093724.GA21441@savin.petertodd.org> From: Maksim Solovjov Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 22:58:45 +0300 Message-ID: To: Karl-Johan Alm , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114b3aae1bb3f80569981169" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, 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 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:17:31 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Few questions regarding ListTransaction 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: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 19:58:49 -0000 --001a114b3aae1bb3f80569981169 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable OK. Thank you guys for clarification. On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Karl-Johan Alm via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Thanks for clarifying! > > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 6:48 PM, ZmnSCPxj wrote= : > > Good morning Karl-Johan Alm, > > > > To clarify: > > > > Nothing prevents a miner from completely ignoring nSequence when puttin= g > transactions in blocks. > > > > Unconfirmed transactions are, by definition, not recorded in blocks. S= o > if there is a transaction 0xFFFFFFF nSequence and fee 1000 satoshi, and > another conflicting transaction 0xFFFFFFF nSequence and fee 100000000 > satoshi, miners can include the latter one even if the first one came to > their knowledge first, regardless nSequence. > > > > Thus, in the end "full replace-by-fee", where nSequence is IGNORED for > purposes of replace-by-fee, is expected to become the norm, and we should > really be designing our wallets and so on so that we only trust > transactions that have confirmations. > > > > The "nSequence=3D0xFFFFFFFF means opt-OUT of RBF" convention is only > followed by fullnodes running standard bitcoind. Nothing prevents miners > from running patched bitcoind that ignores this rule, and connecting with > similar peers who also ignore this rule. > > > > Regards, > > ZmnSCPxj > > > > > > Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. > > > > =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 Origina= l Message =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 > > > > On April 11, 2018 5:37 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 05:10:43PM +0900, Karl-Johan Alm wrote: > >> > >> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:52 PM, Peter Todd pete@petertodd.org wrote= : > >> > > >> > > Or via full replace-by-fee, which appears to be used by a > significant minority > >> > > > >> > > of miners: > >> > > >> > I was of the impression that final transactions (sequence=3D0xffffff= ff) > >> > > >> > cannot be RBF'd. > >> > >> My full-replace-by-fee tree ignores that. It also does preferential > peering to > >> > >> ensure it's well connected with likewise peers, and thus the whole > network. > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------------------------------------------------ > --------------------------------------- > >> > >> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org > >> > >> bitcoin-dev mailing list > >> > >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > >> > >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > --001a114b3aae1bb3f80569981169 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
OK.

Thank you guys for clarification.

On Wed,= Apr 11, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Karl-Johan Alm via bitcoin-dev = <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
Thanks for clarifying!

On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 6:48 PM, ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> wrote:
> Good morning Karl-Johan Alm,
>
> To clarify:
>
> Nothing prevents a miner from completely ignoring nSequence when putti= ng transactions in blocks.
>
> Unconfirmed transactions are, by definition, not recorded in blocks.= =C2=A0 So if there is a transaction 0xFFFFFFF nSequence and fee 1000 satosh= i, and another conflicting transaction 0xFFFFFFF nSequence and fee 10000000= 0 satoshi, miners can include the latter one even if the first one came to = their knowledge first, regardless nSequence.
>
> Thus, in the end "full replace-by-fee", where nSequence is I= GNORED for purposes of replace-by-fee, is expected to become the norm, and = we should really be designing our wallets and so on so that we only trust t= ransactions that have confirmations.
>
> The "nSequence=3D0xFFFFFFFF means opt-OUT of RBF" convention= is only followed by fullnodes running standard bitcoind.=C2=A0 Nothing pre= vents miners from running patched bitcoind that ignores this rule, and conn= ecting with similar peers who also ignore this rule.
>
> Regards,
> ZmnSCPxj
>
>
> Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
>
> =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 Origin= al Message =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90<= br> >
> On April 11, 2018 5:37 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfo= undation.org> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 05:10:43PM +0900, Karl-Johan Alm wrote: >>
>> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:52 PM, Peter Todd pete@petertodd.org wrote:
>> >
>> > > Or via full replace-by-fee, which appears to be used by = a significant minority
>> > >
>> > > of miners:
>> >
>> > I was of the impression that final transactions (sequence=3D0= xffffffff)
>> >
>> > cannot be RBF'd.
>>
>> My full-replace-by-fee tree ignores that. It also does preferentia= l peering to
>>
>> ensure it's well connected with likewise peers, and thus the w= hole network.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------<= wbr>-------------------------------------------------------------= --------------------------------------
>>
>> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
>>
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>>
>> bitcoin-d= ev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation= .org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.= linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org= /mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

--001a114b3aae1bb3f80569981169--