From: jl2012@xbt•hk
To: bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fill-or-kill transaction
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 23:27:54 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <014345a983eabf243d9ce127de0dff7c@xbt.hk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <C9A1D16E-03F7-4860-8E9B-32A98E06CE49@petertodd.org>
Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-09-17 18:44 寫到:
> It can be implemented by a "treat like Coinbase" flag in the
> UTXO set, set when the output is created.
I think this is the cleanest way to implement the maturity requirement.
I understand why we need maturity, However, requiring 100 block maturity
will unfortunately make the system much less appealing since the
recipient may not like it. A fill-or-kill tx may still be used as the
initial funding tx to the Lightning Network, as long as the counterparty
is willing to take the extra risk.
Actually, a fill-or-kill tx is slight safer than a coinbase tx,
depending on the difference between the absolute kill time and actual
confirmation time. In a re-org, an orphaned coinbase tx is permanently
invalidated and has no hope to be included again. However, an orphaned
fill-or-kill tx may still be confirmed by another miner. If there is
still a few days until the absolute kill time, a fill-or-kill tx is
basically as safe as a normal tx.
With possibility of re-org and unpredictable block interval in mind,
height-based fill-or-kill is not very useful since it is difficult for
users to determine the actual kill time. If we could abolish the idea of
height-based fill-or-kill, the resolution of time-based fill-or-kill
might be improved.
------------------------------------
Chun Wang 於 2015-09-17 18:33 寫到:
> We are currently using nLockTime for share info and nSequence for
> extranonce2. I have carefully reviewed the reference implementation of
> BIP68 and it should be compatible, but this proposal may break the
> implementation unless it does not affect coinbase transactions.
>
The fill-or-kill system is totally optional, using a bit flag in tx
nVersion to indicate. Everything should be fine unless you are also
messing with the nVersion
-------------------------------------
Btc Drak 於 2015-09-17 15:12 寫到:
> Forgive me if I have missed the exact use-case, but this seems overly
> complex. Surely fill-or-kill refers to getting a transaction confirmed
> within a few confirms or to drop the tx from the mempool so it wont be
> considered for inclusion anymore. As such, you could just repurpose a
> small range of nLocktime such that a TX will be accepted into mempool
> for a specific period before expiring.
What I'm describing is to implement fill-or-kill as consensus rule.
Certainly, we could implement it at the P2P network level: everything is
the same as I described, but the nLockTime2 and nKillTime are for
reference only and tx validity depends only on the nLockTime. Benevolent
miners should drop the tx after the suggested kill time but there is no
guarantee
-------------------------------------
I made a mistake in this example:
> A user wants his tx get confirmed in the block 630000, the first block
> with reward below 10BTC. He is willing to pay high fee but don't want
> it gets into another block. He will set nLockTime2 = 210,000 and
> nKillTime = 0
The correct nLockTime2 for this example should be 210000/4 = 52500
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-18 3:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-17 18:41 jl2012
2015-09-17 19:07 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-09-17 19:14 ` Jorge Timón
2015-09-17 22:44 ` Peter Todd
2015-09-18 3:27 ` jl2012 [this message]
2015-09-18 6:42 ` Btc Drak
2015-09-18 9:12 ` jl2012
2015-09-19 15:31 ` Tom Harding
2015-09-18 13:08 ` Jorge Timón
2015-09-22 17:45 ` Jorge Timón
2015-09-19 2:01 ` Luke Dashjr
2015-09-19 5:09 ` Jorge Timón
2015-09-17 19:12 ` Btc Drak
2015-09-17 22:33 ` Chun Wang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=014345a983eabf243d9ce127de0dff7c@xbt.hk \
--to=jl2012@xbt$(echo .)hk \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox