public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Danny Thorpe <danny.thorpe@gmail•com>
To: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] First-Seen-Safe Replace-by-Fee
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 15:09:35 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJN5wHVq67m-fDZLwkHhjtsoDdqP70DKMziuM7RueazQ=+tdhg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPg+sBisM6FVEDo0uqgvFwVxB71r_f4T5bAr91esv9r78wf6wA@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1228 bytes --]

Thanks for the clarification.

So, since RBF applies only to pending transactions in the mempool awaiting
incorporation into a block, there is a window of opportunity in which the
pending tx is incorporated into a block at the same time that the spender
is constructing and publishing a replacement for that pending tx.

The replacement transaction would be rejected by the peer network as a
double spend because it conflicts with the now confirmed original tx, and
the spender will have to go back and create a new stand-alone transaction
to accomplish what they hoped to do with an RBF replacement.

So an implementation that wishes to take advantage of RBF will still need
to have a "plan B" implementation path to handle the corner case of a
replacement tx being rejected as a double spend.

Is this correct?

I'm just trying to get my head around the implementation cost vs benefit of
RBF in the context of my applications.

Thanks,
-Danny

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com>
wrote:

> It's just a mempool policy rule.
>
> Allowing the contents of blocks to change (other than by mining a
> competing chain) would be pretty much the largest possible change to
> Bitcoin's design....
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1731 bytes --]

next prev parent reply	other threads:[~2015-05-26 22:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-26  5:13 Peter Todd
2015-05-26 17:54 ` Tom Harding
2015-05-26 19:10   ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-05-26 23:00     ` Tom Harding
2015-05-26 23:11       ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-05-26 23:42         ` Tom Harding
2015-05-26 21:20 ` Danny Thorpe
2015-05-26 21:27   ` Pieter Wuille
2015-05-26 22:09     ` Danny Thorpe [this message]
2015-05-26 22:18       ` Adam Back
2015-05-27  7:30 ` Peter Todd
2015-06-10  9:10 ` [Bitcoin-development] First-Seen-Safe Replace-by-Fee patch against Bitcoin Core v0.10.2 Peter Todd

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='CAJN5wHVq67m-fDZLwkHhjtsoDdqP70DKMziuM7RueazQ=+tdhg@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=danny.thorpe@gmail$(echo .)com \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
    --cc=pieter.wuille@gmail$(echo .)com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox