On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 4:08 PM Eric Voskuil <e...@voskuil.org> wrote:
> > > On Jan 31, 2022, at 15:15, Bram Cohen via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > Is it still verboten to acknowledge that RBF is normal behavior and > disallowing it is the feature, and that feature is mostly there to appease > some people's delusions that zeroconf is a thing? It seems a bit overdue to > disrespect the RBF flag in the direction of always assuming it's on. > > What flag? > The opt-in RBF flag in transactions. > There are two different common regimes which result in different > incentivized behavior. One of them is that there's more than a block's > backlog in the mempool in which case between two conflicting transactions > the one with the higher fee rate should win. In the other case where there > isn't a whole block's worth of transactions the one with higher total value > should win. > > These are not distinct scenarios. The rational choice is the highest fee > block-valid subgraph of the set of unconfirmed transactions, in both cases > (within the limits of what is computationally feasible of course). > It's weird because which of two or more conflicting transactions should win can oscillate back and forth depending on other stuff going on in the mempool. There's already a bit of that with child pays but this is stranger and has more oddball edge cases about which transactions to route.
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
