First-seen-safe Replace-by-Fee is now available as a patch against
v0.10.2:
https://github.com/petertodd/bitcoin/tree/first-seen-safe-rbf-v0.10.2
I've also had a pull-req against git HEAD open for a few weeks now:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6176#issuecomment-104877829
I've
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 01:13:05AM -0400, Peter Todd wrote:
Case 1: Increasing the fee on a single tx
-
We start with a 1-in-2-out P2PKH using transaction t1, 226 bytes in size
with the minimal relay fee, 2.26uBTC. Increasing the fee while
respecting
I think this is a significant step forward.
I suggest you also need to ensure that no inputs can be removed or
changed (other than scriptsigs) -- only added. Otherwise, the semantics
change too much for the original signers. Imagine a tx with two inputs
from different parties. Should it be
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Tom Harding t...@thinlink.com wrote:
It's not difficult to
imagine real-world consequences to not having contributed to the
transaction.
I'm having a hard time. Can you help me understand a specific case
where this makes a difference.
It appears to be a
Apologies if this has already been stated and I missed it, but:
Can transactions in a buried block be overridden/replaced by RBF?
Or is RBF strictly limited to transactions that have not yet been
incorporated into a block?
Thanks,
-Danny
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Peter Todd
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
--
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Tom Harding t...@thinlink.com wrote:
The bitcoin transaction is part of a real-world deal with unknown
connections to the other parts
I'm having a hard time parsing this. You might as well say that its
part of a weeblix for how informative it is, since you've
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
I think the point is the replacement tx spends the same inputs (plus
additional inputs), so if the original tx is accepted, and your
replacement rejected, thats good news - you dont have to pay the
higher fee, the extra input remains unspent (and can be used later for
other purpose) and the extra
On 5/26/2015 4:11 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Tom Harding t...@thinlink.com wrote:
The bitcoin transaction is part of a real-world deal with unknown
connections to the other parts
I'm having a hard time parsing this. You might as well say that its
part of a
Summary
---
First-seen-safe replace-by-fee (FSS RBF) does the following:
1) Give users effective ways of getting stuck transactions unstuck.
2) Use blockchain space efficiently.
without:
3) Changing the status quo with regard to zeroconf.
The current Bitcoin Core implementation has
11 matches
Mail list logo