* [Bitcoin-development] Suggestion: allow receivers to pay optional fee for transactions without fees @ 2014-01-17 1:39 Dâniel Fraga 2014-01-17 1:52 ` Ben Davenport 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Dâniel Fraga @ 2014-01-17 1:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bitcoin-development Someone sent me a very small donation (0.00121 BTC) without paying fees. I don't know who sent it and I know this type of transaction are usually rejected by miners. Take a look at it below: https://imageshack.com/i/ngv5g8j Even with the a low probability of confirmation, I was hoping that after a few days it could be included in a block, but Blockchain.info simply removed it (I know the sender sent from a Blockchain.info wallet, because he added a note): https://blockchain.info/pt/tx/3cde47ee3979a46b36bd61bdb0caf9c11dea58ac99f17fb17b95728766de70e0 As you can see now it shows as "Transaction not found". My suggestion is: it would be nice if the receiver could have a chance to pay the fee when the sender didn't pay any fee. For example, I could pay a fee of 0.0001 BTC and receive 0.00121 BTC. In the end I'd have 0.00111 BTC. Better than nothing. Would it be technically possible to do that or it would be too much trouble to change the protocol to allow the receiver to pay an optional fee? Ps: I'm not a programmer, but if the receiver could optionally "attach" some fee to the transaction, even if he/she didn't sent the transaction, this could be solved. Bitcoin-qt could even warn the receiver he received a transaction without fee and if he wants faster confirmation he could pay a fee. Ps2: if this is a silly suggestion, just ignore it. I tried on Bitcointalk, but nobody answered. -- Linux 3.12.0: One Giant Leap for Frogkind http://www.youtube.com/DanielFragaBR http://mcxnow.com Bitcoin: 12H6661yoLDUZaYPdah6urZS5WiXwTAUgL ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] Suggestion: allow receivers to pay optional fee for transactions without fees 2014-01-17 1:39 [Bitcoin-development] Suggestion: allow receivers to pay optional fee for transactions without fees Dâniel Fraga @ 2014-01-17 1:52 ` Ben Davenport 2014-01-17 2:06 ` Dâniel Fraga 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Ben Davenport @ 2014-01-17 1:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dâniel Fraga; +Cc: bitcoin-development [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2779 bytes --] You can create a transaction which spends the output to yourself, attaching a fee to that transaction. In order for miners to grab the transaction fee on that transaction, they would have to also mine the original transaction. Likely, you'd have to do this by hand, but software could be written to simplify doing it. No protocol changes needed. Ben On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Dâniel Fraga <fragabr@gmail•com> wrote: > Someone sent me a very small donation (0.00121 BTC) without > paying fees. I don't know who sent it and I know this type of > transaction are usually rejected by miners. Take a look at it below: > > https://imageshack.com/i/ngv5g8j > > Even with the a low probability of confirmation, I > was hoping that after a few days it could be included in a block, but > Blockchain.info simply removed it (I know the sender sent from a > Blockchain.info wallet, because he added a note): > > > https://blockchain.info/pt/tx/3cde47ee3979a46b36bd61bdb0caf9c11dea58ac99f17fb17b95728766de70e0 > > As you can see now it shows as "Transaction not found". > > My suggestion is: it would be nice if the receiver could have a > chance to pay the fee when the sender didn't pay any fee. For example, > I could pay a fee of 0.0001 BTC and receive 0.00121 BTC. In the end I'd > have 0.00111 BTC. Better than nothing. > > Would it be technically possible to do that or it would be too > much trouble to change the protocol to allow the receiver to pay an > optional fee? > > Ps: I'm not a programmer, but if the receiver could > optionally "attach" some fee to the transaction, even if he/she didn't > sent the transaction, this could be solved. Bitcoin-qt could even warn > the receiver he received a transaction without fee and if he wants > faster confirmation he could pay a fee. > > Ps2: if this is a silly suggestion, just ignore it. I tried on > Bitcointalk, but nobody answered. > > -- > Linux 3.12.0: One Giant Leap for Frogkind > http://www.youtube.com/DanielFragaBR > http://mcxnow.com > Bitcoin: 12H6661yoLDUZaYPdah6urZS5WiXwTAUgL > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services. > Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For > Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between. > Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today. > > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3819 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] Suggestion: allow receivers to pay optional fee for transactions without fees 2014-01-17 1:52 ` Ben Davenport @ 2014-01-17 2:06 ` Dâniel Fraga 2014-01-17 2:39 ` Christophe Biocca 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Dâniel Fraga @ 2014-01-17 2:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bitcoin-development This is good news! Thank you very much Ben for the answer. On Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:52:39 -0800 Ben Davenport <bendavenport@gmail•com> wrote: > You can create a transaction which spends the output to yourself, attaching > a fee to that transaction. In order for miners to grab the transaction fee > on that transaction, they would have to also mine the original transaction. > Likely, you'd have to do this by hand, but software could be written to > simplify doing it. No protocol changes needed. > > Ben > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Dâniel Fraga <fragabr@gmail•com> wrote: > > > Someone sent me a very small donation (0.00121 BTC) without > > paying fees. I don't know who sent it and I know this type of > > transaction are usually rejected by miners. Take a look at it below: > > > > https://imageshack.com/i/ngv5g8j > > > > Even with the a low probability of confirmation, I > > was hoping that after a few days it could be included in a block, but > > Blockchain.info simply removed it (I know the sender sent from a > > Blockchain.info wallet, because he added a note): > > > > > > https://blockchain.info/pt/tx/3cde47ee3979a46b36bd61bdb0caf9c11dea58ac99f17fb17b95728766de70e0 > > > > As you can see now it shows as "Transaction not found". > > > > My suggestion is: it would be nice if the receiver could have a > > chance to pay the fee when the sender didn't pay any fee. For example, > > I could pay a fee of 0.0001 BTC and receive 0.00121 BTC. In the end I'd > > have 0.00111 BTC. Better than nothing. > > > > Would it be technically possible to do that or it would be too > > much trouble to change the protocol to allow the receiver to pay an > > optional fee? > > > > Ps: I'm not a programmer, but if the receiver could > > optionally "attach" some fee to the transaction, even if he/she didn't > > sent the transaction, this could be solved. Bitcoin-qt could even warn > > the receiver he received a transaction without fee and if he wants > > faster confirmation he could pay a fee. > > > > Ps2: if this is a silly suggestion, just ignore it. I tried on > > Bitcointalk, but nobody answered. > > > > -- > > Linux 3.12.0: One Giant Leap for Frogkind > > http://www.youtube.com/DanielFragaBR > > http://mcxnow.com > > Bitcoin: 12H6661yoLDUZaYPdah6urZS5WiXwTAUgL > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services. > > Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For > > Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between. > > Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today. > > > > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > > _______________________________________________ > > Bitcoin-development mailing list > > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > > -- Linux 3.12.0: One Giant Leap for Frogkind http://www.youtube.com/DanielFragaBR http://mcxnow.com Bitcoin: 12H6661yoLDUZaYPdah6urZS5WiXwTAUgL ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] Suggestion: allow receivers to pay optional fee for transactions without fees 2014-01-17 2:06 ` Dâniel Fraga @ 2014-01-17 2:39 ` Christophe Biocca 2014-01-17 5:40 ` Luke-Jr 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Christophe Biocca @ 2014-01-17 2:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dâniel Fraga; +Cc: bitcoin-development To clarify, there are proposals to make miners recognize this situation and account for it, only eligius is running it at the moment IIRC: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/8390/are-there-any-pools-or-large-miners-running-child-pays-for-parent-patch Right now if you were to try it likely wouldn't result in inclusion. But this is on the radar, and I suspect it'll eventually get merged into mainline. On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Dâniel Fraga <fragabr@gmail•com> wrote: > This is good news! Thank you very much Ben for the answer. > > On Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:52:39 -0800 > Ben Davenport <bendavenport@gmail•com> wrote: > >> You can create a transaction which spends the output to yourself, attaching >> a fee to that transaction. In order for miners to grab the transaction fee >> on that transaction, they would have to also mine the original transaction. >> Likely, you'd have to do this by hand, but software could be written to >> simplify doing it. No protocol changes needed. >> >> Ben >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Dâniel Fraga <fragabr@gmail•com> wrote: >> >> > Someone sent me a very small donation (0.00121 BTC) without >> > paying fees. I don't know who sent it and I know this type of >> > transaction are usually rejected by miners. Take a look at it below: >> > >> > https://imageshack.com/i/ngv5g8j >> > >> > Even with the a low probability of confirmation, I >> > was hoping that after a few days it could be included in a block, but >> > Blockchain.info simply removed it (I know the sender sent from a >> > Blockchain.info wallet, because he added a note): >> > >> > >> > https://blockchain.info/pt/tx/3cde47ee3979a46b36bd61bdb0caf9c11dea58ac99f17fb17b95728766de70e0 >> > >> > As you can see now it shows as "Transaction not found". >> > >> > My suggestion is: it would be nice if the receiver could have a >> > chance to pay the fee when the sender didn't pay any fee. For example, >> > I could pay a fee of 0.0001 BTC and receive 0.00121 BTC. In the end I'd >> > have 0.00111 BTC. Better than nothing. >> > >> > Would it be technically possible to do that or it would be too >> > much trouble to change the protocol to allow the receiver to pay an >> > optional fee? >> > >> > Ps: I'm not a programmer, but if the receiver could >> > optionally "attach" some fee to the transaction, even if he/she didn't >> > sent the transaction, this could be solved. Bitcoin-qt could even warn >> > the receiver he received a transaction without fee and if he wants >> > faster confirmation he could pay a fee. >> > >> > Ps2: if this is a silly suggestion, just ignore it. I tried on >> > Bitcointalk, but nobody answered. >> > >> > -- >> > Linux 3.12.0: One Giant Leap for Frogkind >> > http://www.youtube.com/DanielFragaBR >> > http://mcxnow.com >> > Bitcoin: 12H6661yoLDUZaYPdah6urZS5WiXwTAUgL >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services. >> > Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For >> > Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between. >> > Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today. >> > >> > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Bitcoin-development mailing list >> > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >> > >> > > > -- > Linux 3.12.0: One Giant Leap for Frogkind > http://www.youtube.com/DanielFragaBR > http://mcxnow.com > Bitcoin: 12H6661yoLDUZaYPdah6urZS5WiXwTAUgL > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services. > Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For > Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between. > Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today. > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] Suggestion: allow receivers to pay optional fee for transactions without fees 2014-01-17 2:39 ` Christophe Biocca @ 2014-01-17 5:40 ` Luke-Jr 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Luke-Jr @ 2014-01-17 5:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bitcoin-development; +Cc: Dâniel Fraga On Friday, January 17, 2014 2:39:31 AM Christophe Biocca wrote: > To clarify, there are proposals to make miners recognize this > situation and account for it, only eligius is running it at the moment > IIRC: > http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/8390/are-there-any-pools-or-larg > e-miners-running-child-pays-for-parent-patch Right now if you were to try > it likely wouldn't result in inclusion. But this is on the radar, and I > suspect it'll eventually get merged into mainline. If you did it and relayed directly to Eligius, it'd probably get mined.. the hard part is creating the transaction - once that's done it's smooth sailing ;) Side note: mining nodes should *not* be running mainline. In fact, they should be setting up their own customised transaction policies. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-01-17 5:41 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2014-01-17 1:39 [Bitcoin-development] Suggestion: allow receivers to pay optional fee for transactions without fees Dâniel Fraga 2014-01-17 1:52 ` Ben Davenport 2014-01-17 2:06 ` Dâniel Fraga 2014-01-17 2:39 ` Christophe Biocca 2014-01-17 5:40 ` Luke-Jr
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox