diff options
| author | Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> | 2024-01-22 22:52:01 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2024-01-22 22:52:12 +0000 |
| commit | db7a711b6fdb661cf8de45ce31dfa166440d04ab (patch) | |
| tree | 35daff42b3f3ea6c13343c1305eb2367a8e09689 | |
| parent | dd8b3730662c17228da0e6773163380dba79f7ba (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-db7a711b6fdb661cf8de45ce31dfa166440d04ab.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-db7a711b6fdb661cf8de45ce31dfa166440d04ab.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] One-Shot Replace-By-Fee-Rate
| -rw-r--r-- | 17/9819358dacfdaa636ca0208f3bb7c9eda860fa | 195 |
1 files changed, 195 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/17/9819358dacfdaa636ca0208f3bb7c9eda860fa b/17/9819358dacfdaa636ca0208f3bb7c9eda860fa new file mode 100644 index 000000000..002a271ad --- /dev/null +++ b/17/9819358dacfdaa636ca0208f3bb7c9eda860fa @@ -0,0 +1,195 @@ +Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org> +Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) + by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 958CEC0037 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 22 Jan 2024 22:52:12 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E7DD61037 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 22 Jan 2024 22:52:12 +0000 (UTC) +DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 5E7DD61037 +Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, + unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com + header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=ruSNFOF1 +X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -2.6 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, + RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, + RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] + autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no +Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id 9SKy9RmL3gfv + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 22 Jan 2024 22:52:08 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com + [66.111.4.25]) + by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA6AD61027 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 22 Jan 2024 22:52:07 +0000 (UTC) +DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org BA6AD61027 +Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.48]) + by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EED45C01AB; + Mon, 22 Jan 2024 17:52:06 -0500 (EST) +Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) + by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 22 Jan 2024 17:52:06 -0500 +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= + messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:content-type:date:date + :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to + :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to + :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= + fm3; t=1705963926; x=1706050326; bh=AytNHEN4+pFqUn4u75dixJbnTLkI + aF8Tppgs99AXxf0=; b=ruSNFOF1/oi031YnD80BA/XMXRr5GCyemh2rZv/cEdSA + qX50UFtbi3ThhoQxRkeTC3qKIG2DNymvXRn6m6Bp+RM6iloJJ/GA7GCAYLNJutIN + YBt6WY6+ApuTV9Zxiq4pBL3Em/DTBQsJqIkhNRIjqBik0kIz1NdLBwR/hBUQaSDn + n0fB2B+04P/o3Rg50jNtoyV7q0an+GSQ8oWmW2XZHCogZvqtgfnuzNCYEg9E0fSQ + lLgv4CJ+rTk3hQQpYSU9rOdzXapzI9kS1EUFWzpnDHmIxEHlo1lJJ74IftNk1lHP + WEZM21YYfYY7rySIHm2Wi34BHspcEzllOI7aTQVMxg== +X-ME-Sender: <xms:lfGuZZMM-vW7QAOLXvJOz-z_odi5yhKi6Y-gneMyLRXd9WAu6Fd75g> + <xme:lfGuZb-IPbxcp92M1gjaaDzTwYqKn1KX2p1_NYyerQ2Ijt2v9yO-KBB4jYVsvQQ4r + aVE3-hRbHuF8aiL4Is> +X-ME-Received: <xmr:lfGuZYQrgxjAA5WXQoLGu4ZP1kg121PKgYExYuIoKxWJKIZnnczqniXZEQ> +X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvkedrvdekjedgtdduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf + fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen + uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesghdtre + ertddtjeenucfhrhhomheprfgvthgvrhcuvfhougguuceophgvthgvsehpvghtvghrthho + uggurdhorhhgqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedvuedvveeiveegheethfefheejteefvd + elffeigfeivdduveelteeiueekgeevvdenucffohhmrghinhepphgvthgvrhhtohguugdr + ohhrghdpshhtrggtkhgvrhdrnhgvfihspdhgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvg + hrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehpvghtvgesphgvthgvrhht + ohguugdrohhrgh +X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:lfGuZVuLhSPXSmYiPF6y8sB1aGhqFjEWf7QkXUdbkc9ieW5fQcStUg> + <xmx:lfGuZRfcN7kPPjA6xAfkDyKPq-tQmQAv6_q9drTnSphgDeZmwGQ1vQ> + <xmx:lfGuZR38n2RMavXmqTmcADPyo6rMJDbbw4jRe9AWWyvnh64wQ_lPXw> + <xmx:lvGuZV7oDq_0vVjrC8vWHc3EVn4ZHAN7gzeHDgWa0A615UN7dSWrag> +Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail +Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, + 22 Jan 2024 17:52:05 -0500 (EST) +Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) + id A7C465F849; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 22:52:01 +0000 (UTC) +Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 22:52:01 +0000 +From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> +To: Murch <murch@murch.one>, + Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +Message-ID: <Za7xkUsoeACMv6Fw@petertodd.org> +References: <Zalsq+Nq7RRr/CAR@petertodd.org> + <9a89eca8-61fd-4156-825d-c9b718dc3034@murch.one> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="sh/rvim7uikMYwTI" +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <9a89eca8-61fd-4156-825d-c9b718dc3034@murch.one> +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] One-Shot Replace-By-Fee-Rate +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 +Precedence: list +List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 22:52:12 -0000 + + +--sh/rvim7uikMYwTI +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 +Content-Disposition: inline +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 01:12:45PM -0500, Murch via bitcoin-dev wrote: +> Hi Peter, +>=20 +> On 1/18/24 13:23, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote: +> > Reposting this blog post here for discussion: +> > +> > https://petertodd.org/2024/one-shot-replace-by-fee-rate +>=20 +> I saw your proposal mentioned on Stacker News and read it with interest. = +In +> response, I described a replacement cycle that can be used to broadcast t= +he +> same five transactions repeatedly: +>=20 +> https://stacker.news/items/393182 + +So if this does in fact work - I haven't actually tested it - the root prob= +lem +here is not replace-by-fee-rate, but rather our current replace-by-fee rule= +s: +in step 7 you've clearly replaced a more desirable, high fee-rate, transact= +ion +that will be mined soon with a low fee-rate transaction that will not be. +That's obviously not incentive compatible for miners, for the same reason t= +hat +replace-by-fee-rate generally is incentive compatible. + +I had incorrectly thought we had gotten rid of those cases... But looks like +the definition of BIP-125 Rule #2, "The replacement transaction may only +include an unconfirmed input if that input was included in one of the origi= +nal +transactions.", is not sufficient because you can combine unconfirmed inputs +=66rom two different replaced transactions, making a resulting transaction = +that +is less valuable to miners than one of the replaced transactions. + +IIUC Suhas has a draft fix here that would solve this issue: https://github= +=2Ecom/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26451 + +An even simpler fix would be to just require that all unconfirmed inputs in= + a +replacement come from the *same* replaced transaction. That would make cert= +ain +rare, but economically viable, replacements infeasible. But it would defini= +tely +fix the issue. + +> The gist is that by using two confirmed inputs and five transactions, you +> can use RBFr to reduce the absolute fee while raising the feerate to top +> block levels, then immediately use the current RBF rules to introduce a +> high-feerate transaction that beats the RBFr transaction but is hampered = +by +> a low-feerate parent and not attractive for mining, then use RBF to repla= +ce +> its low-feerate parent, then use the RBFr transaction again to reduce the +> absolute feerate. Due to the asymmetric replacements, the same transactio= +ns +> can replace each other in that order in every cycle. Please refer to the +> linked write-up for details, I=E2=80=99ve included weights, fees, and a t= +ransaction +> graph to make my example comprehensible. + +BTW do you mind if I reproduce those graphics, with credit, to explain the +issue? I have a few places where I could make use of it, eg the +replace-by-fee-rate post itself. + +--=20 +https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org + +--sh/rvim7uikMYwTI +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- + +iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE0RcYcKRzsEwFZ3N5Lly11TVRLzcFAmWu8YIACgkQLly11TVR +LzfqeRAAhOsWablFP/QAA6zjZtTgw9k6SowqOpGjCHXOOPbKv7bMJ2UqDg3wnbCF +BKJNwLc+SRhVtLdT64uCbGi5L1sg1TvCf+hsoSWnwjhuvKX93br5bEc+VYWu+l61 +np4y4v7YnHbrFMb34wYOmmUXLeW2lbhXsZaz51OoNfoSuVdG5ZGWPrqSFERK2p6n +hUEDqOsrYHa6A4PRwFt3LJR16s2nZp1Qq3ls3byFvF7kgcZx21/V29lDMqzwOG8B +0CTuWO8YdMCA755UO/wpTLR2m+XdTTDht0G5klF1HU6oFj+WXZHOzPxHVNoRBGyX +7uUCEfdUbjsEnuqeG/eGY04PL+eEIWIwo0MxjW4qdnOsfK+YM7Q59IK691GYVs6v +Rya7xdLfWe8QkVWxpC+9/d8C3sa+a3l/S7Pk/x1cqzlpP17ZXUHQE6PIg2K/j2/3 +4h43Rd2l7dCeaMq9p/bL2EEx1+ZT0gZpFYIXK+yMtSrlwDXKd9jzj700plfKxP7G +b3nfnJbIKKho+rXVIB1Ns11CVfDQJuXdZm6znkvjKUK+FFQSgaYHz/8E6K8JM7jo +rBOJR8PI5okQ9JLs0pTb+whoIkSLwFRYhjsyLuhx2W1uMU8GAmClca34LqIzMt3o +xF1AExl238TyOOIV/WWy9efsR0ROpUG+h6RWOeVbvnJfBRjWq9k= +=09en +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--sh/rvim7uikMYwTI-- + |