MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AE14915B-37DF-4D94-A0B1-E32A26903807@sprovoost.nl>
References: <AE14915B-37DF-4D94-A0B1-E32A26903807@sprovoost.nl>
From: CryptAxe <cryptaxe@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 11:40:42 -0800
Message-ID: <CAF5CFkhwj5BHPndasvX5zYzmVwOF09XxzZo8hQO_f_1L3Vc+cg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sjors Provoost <sjors@sprovoost.nl>, 
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1b4f1eadbf43055f9d02d9"
Cc: Matt Corallo <matt@chaincode.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP-21 amendment proposal: -no125
Precedence: list

--94eb2c1b4f1eadbf43055f9d02d9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Perhaps instead of a flag that can be used to disable a specific operation,
there should be a "-ignoredflags=x,y,z" section of the URI that can be used
to ignore whatever BIP this might also be useful for in the future?

On Dec 5, 2017 11:34 AM, "Sjors Provoost via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> One way to reduce fees is to encourage usage of Replace-By-Fee, BIP 125
> [0]. It allows wallets to recommend lower fees, because if a transaction
> gets stuck due to underestimation, the fee can easily be bumped.
>
> Bitcoin Core has had support for RBF for a while, and as of v0.15.0
> recommends lower fees [1] when the user chooses to use RBF.
>
> I recently submitted a pull request that would turn on RBF by default,
> which triggered some discussion [2]. To ease the transition for merchants
> who are reluctant to see their customers use RBF, Matt Corallo suggested
> that wallets honor a no125=1 flag.
>
> So a BIP-21 URI would look like this: bitcoin:175t...45W?amount=20.
> 3&no125=1
>
> When this flag is set, wallets should not use RBF, regardless of their
> default, unless the user explicitly overrides the merchant's preference.
>
> Afaik adding this flag won't break existing BIP-21 support. It doesn't use
> the req- prefix, because it's optional. I'm also not aware of any ad hoc
> standards that use no125 in BIP-21-ish URIs.
>
> - Sjors
>
> P.S. I'd similarly suggest adding a bech32 param, but that's for another
> discussion
>
> [0] https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0125.mediawiki
> [1] https://bitcoincore.org/en/2017/09/01/release-0.15.0/#
> better-fee-estimates
> [2] https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11605
> [3] https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11828
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>

--94eb2c1b4f1eadbf43055f9d02d9
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif">Perhaps instead of=
 a flag that can be used to disable a specific operation, there should be a=
 &quot;-ignoredflags=3Dx,y,z&quot; section of the URI that can be used to i=
gnore whatever BIP this might also be useful for in the future?=C2=A0</span=
></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Dec 5, =
2017 11:34 AM, &quot;Sjors Provoost via bitcoin-dev&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"ma=
ilto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundati=
on.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_qu=
ote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex=
">One way to reduce fees is to encourage usage of Replace-By-Fee, BIP 125 [=
0]. It allows wallets to recommend lower fees, because if a transaction get=
s stuck due to underestimation, the fee can easily be bumped.<br>
<br>
Bitcoin Core has had support for RBF for a while, and as of v0.15.0 recomme=
nds lower fees [1] when the user chooses to use RBF.<br>
<br>
I recently submitted a pull request that would turn on RBF by default, whic=
h triggered some discussion [2]. To ease the transition for merchants who a=
re reluctant to see their customers use RBF, Matt Corallo suggested that wa=
llets honor a no125=3D1 flag.<br>
<br>
So a BIP-21 URI would look like this: bitcoin:175t...45W?amount=3D20.<wbr>3=
&amp;no125=3D1<br>
<br>
When this flag is set, wallets should not use RBF, regardless of their defa=
ult, unless the user explicitly overrides the merchant&#39;s preference.<br=
>
<br>
Afaik adding this flag won&#39;t break existing BIP-21 support. It doesn=
9;t use the req- prefix, because it&#39;s optional. I&#39;m also not aware =
of any ad hoc standards that use no125 in BIP-21-ish URIs.<br>
<br>
- Sjors<br>
<br>
P.S. I&#39;d similarly suggest adding a bech32 param, but that&#39;s for an=
other discussion<br>
<br>
[0] <a href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0125.mediawi=
ki" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/bitcoin/<wbr>bi=
ps/blob/master/bip-0125.<wbr>mediawiki</a><br>
[1] <a href=3D"https://bitcoincore.org/en/2017/09/01/release-0.15.0/#better=
-fee-estimates" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://bitcoincore.or=
g/en/<wbr>2017/09/01/release-0.15.0/#<wbr>better-fee-estimates</a><br>
[2] <a href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11605" rel=3D"norefe=
rrer" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/bitcoin/<wbr>bitcoin/pull/11605<=
/a><br>
[3] <a href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11828" rel=3D"nore=
ferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/bitcoin/<wbr>bitcoin/issues/11=
828</a><br>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div></div>

--94eb2c1b4f1eadbf43055f9d02d9--