Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.214.173 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.214.173; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ob0-f173.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <20131024143043.GA12658@savin>
References: <20131024143043.GA12658@savin>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:38:16 +0200
Message-ID: <CANEZrP100Lg_1LcFMKx1yWrGTSFb5GZmLmXNbZjPGaiEgOeuwA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0111bca49c18a904e97d95a1
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Making fee estimation better
Precedence: list

--089e0111bca49c18a904e97d95a1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:

> Quick thought on how to make blockchain-based fee estimates work better
> in the context of out-of-band mining contracts: have miners advertise in
> their coinbase's what fees were actually paid, as opposed to appear to
> have been paid.


This is interesting, but I suppose some miners may have business models
that can't be easily summed up as a "fee" - like all-you-can-eat deals with
certain providers, or preference to certain kinds of transactions etc.

For the concern that estimation might force fees down too far if miners
include private transactions, I thought the estimates were calculated only
on broadcast transactions, so transactions that just appear in a block
won't ever influence the estimate?

--089e0111bca49c18a904e97d95a1
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Peter Todd <span dir=3D"l=
tr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:pete@petertodd.org" target=3D"_blank">pete@petert=
odd.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"g=
mail_quote">
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Quick thought on how to make blockchain-base=
d fee estimates work better<br>
in the context of out-of-band mining contracts: have miners advertise in<br=
>
their coinbase&#39;s what fees were actually paid, as opposed to appear to<=
br>
have been paid.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>This is interesting, but I =
suppose some miners may have business models that can&#39;t be easily summe=
d up as a &quot;fee&quot; - like all-you-can-eat deals with certain provide=
rs, or preference to certain kinds of transactions etc.</div>
<div><br></div><div>For the concern that estimation might force fees down t=
oo far if miners include private transactions, I thought the estimates were=
 calculated only on broadcast transactions, so transactions that just appea=
r in a block won&#39;t ever influence the estimate?=C2=A0</div>
</div></div></div>

--089e0111bca49c18a904e97d95a1--