On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Kaz Wesley wrote: > Any approach based on beginning a transaction expiry countdown when a > transaction is received (as in mempool janitor) seems unviable to me: > ... > That's why I think including information in the transaction itself, as > with my nLockTime/IsStandard proposal, is necessary for transactions > to reliably eventually die off from mempools. > "reliably die off from mempools" leads into the land of "tightly synchronizing memory pools across the network" which is a problem of... large scope and much debate. :) For the moment, simply capping the mempool's size at each local node is a much more reachable goal. Capping, then, implies some culling policy. In general, bitcoind Tx mempool size is rather open ended, and that needs sorting out. -- Jeff Garzik Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/