> On 10 May 2018, at 3:27 AM, Peter Todd <p...@petertodd.org> wrote: > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 01:56:46AM +0800, Johnson Lau via bitcoin-dev wrote: >> You should make a “0 fee tx with exactly one OP_TRUE output” standard, but >> nothing else. This makes sure CPFP will always be needed, so the OP_TRUE >> output won’t pollute the UTXO set >> >> Instead, would you consider to use ANYONECANPAY to sign the tx, so it is >> possible add more inputs for fees? The total tx size is bigger than the >> OP_TRUE approach, but you don’t need to ask for any protocol change. >> >> In long-term, I think the right way is to have a more flexible SIGHASH >> system to allow people to add more inputs and outputs easily. > > I don't think that will work, as a zero-fee tx won't get relayed even with > CPFP, due to the fact that we haven't yet implemented package-based tx > relaying. > > -- > https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
My only concern is UTXO pollution. There could be a “CPFP anchor” softfork that outputs with empty scriptPubKey and 0 value are spendable only in the same block. If not spent immediately, they become invalid and are removed from UTXO. But I still think the best solution is a more flexible SIGHASH system, which doesn’t need CPFP at all. _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
