From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 05:40:52 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.12.6-gentoo; KDE/4.11.2; x86_64; ; )
References: <lba1l3$4tg$1@ger.gmane.org> <lba369$sp9$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<CANOOu=-cA7TTfAtfRy1WL+Dy6EQPwjcTH1m=u+f9RB73wC=btw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANOOu=-cA7TTfAtfRy1WL+Dy6EQPwjcTH1m=u+f9RB73wC=btw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201401170540.53093.luke@dashjr.org>
Cc: =?iso-8859-1?q?D=E2niel_Fraga?= <fragabr@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Suggestion: allow receivers to pay
	optional fee for transactions without fees
Precedence: list

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.