From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp•com.au>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Matt Corallo <matt@chaincode•com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Making OP_TRUE standard?
Date: Sun, 20 May 2018 23:56:58 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180521035658.vfo4wx6ifum2s2o5@petertodd.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87zi0tisft.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1246 bytes --]
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 01:14:06PM +0930, Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Jim Posen <jim.posen@gmail•com> 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?
We've discussed this before: that rule prevents bandwidth usage DoS attacks on
the mempool; it's not a "heuristic". If you drop it, an attacker can repeatedly
broadcast and replace a series of transactions to use up tx relay bandwidth for
significantly lower cost than otherwise.
Though these days with relatively high minimum fees that may not matter.
--
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-21 3:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-08 23:57 Rusty Russell
2018-05-09 0:24 ` Olaoluwa Osuntokun
2018-05-09 3:02 ` ZmnSCPxj
2018-05-10 2:08 ` Rusty Russell
2018-05-09 17:56 ` Johnson Lau
2018-05-09 19:27 ` Peter Todd
2018-05-09 20:19 ` Johnson Lau
2018-05-09 20:59 ` Peter Todd
2018-05-09 22:06 ` Olaoluwa Osuntokun
2018-05-10 2:06 ` Rusty Russell
2018-05-10 2:27 ` Luke Dashjr
2018-05-10 3:07 ` ZmnSCPxj
2018-05-15 1:22 ` ZmnSCPxj
2018-05-17 2:44 ` Rusty Russell
2018-05-17 10:28 ` ZmnSCPxj
2018-05-17 17:35 ` Christian Decker
2018-05-17 20:06 ` Jim Posen
2018-05-21 3:44 ` Rusty Russell
2018-05-21 3:56 ` Peter Todd [this message]
2018-05-30 2:47 ` Rusty Russell
2018-05-31 2:47 ` Rusty Russell
2018-05-21 14:20 ` Russell O'Connor
2018-05-10 9:33 ` Jorge Timón
2018-05-10 9:33 ` Jorge Timón
2018-05-10 9:43 ` Luke Dashjr
2018-05-11 2:44 ` ZmnSCPxj
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=20180521035658.vfo4wx6ifum2s2o5@petertodd.org \
--to=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=matt@chaincode$(echo .)com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp$(echo .)com.au \
/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