Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01DBFC002D for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2022 14:37:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7318A84C80 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2022 14:37:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 7318A84C80 Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=petertodd.org header.i=@petertodd.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm1 header.b=dzqFJNLx; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=jSFtR0bU X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.802 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.802 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 42km_A8Jaz1q for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2022 14:37:44 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 85CA0845B9 Received: from wnew1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wnew1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.26]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85CA0845B9 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2022 14:37:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailnew.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35EC2B05B7D; Tue, 26 Jul 2022 10:37:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 26 Jul 2022 10:37:40 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=petertodd.org; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from :from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1658846260; x= 1658853460; bh=tf3Hlh786wut81RICAoQFAT9d+G4M71MnrYrq7LbGgU=; b=d zqFJNLx84G3vyO6KAtll3yjsc4ai36mnfJH2OPDxFQf/qO1Exh3R1qjKFph1KiLC IrgYrExckKFRmPUUnKL066ZC0WL7RUbMYuZ4YlZjGz3Sg5ZnxADFOA4nisq2LtbA Lb+WV4JmfR1xlk1K1z5eyQloPCtQoAGvbIx2QXtfX/kXHWqZkU+ODal/u9zN6ZPB K5prfvK9FcJnV5Og74rZhqOvxzJXOEoPdhK5RgoyL4+yZS1sN8e16yHljiW/+Umq KwUIp39OIZ1HwvWE3OxbUsdrQYkAHkcXeoPXVWozXidUCQdJ8JpzHVRVmQvO3my7 7dlKczV8/CjEUlYWUopvA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t=1658846260; x= 1658853460; bh=tf3Hlh786wut81RICAoQFAT9d+G4M71MnrYrq7LbGgU=; b=j SFtR0bUWkl/UH2hhQuW2cVa6xCl4vFRCBLPZ5x9Lh/PISYYQBB/xYMRCEyLaFbfG 7xX0PULLjAUFYGfhsk10h5C6LDsil0gh9rqb2xbWud13pXIpQ3yN428AgBRF3BBh jvCEbE9U1It5SGdXvKH7KWFIA065jqlttJJKRMlolj2r39nUmEZZhKJn6OU0nbp9 BydU5H4pfvgDndqj3+82vmQBjKrMYkEze96H+Z5WeVp5OlXLxOmqp434vPSG/R2c xz6re1UI5i8z/8fKOB+YHueU5mpsTiuewpGCuOoZWfis+t8sZIJofDtM7VSmw/9f xJftwAcj4MBl/IZXrvISw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrvddutddgkedtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvfevufgfjghfkfggtgfgsehtqhhmtddtreejnecuhfhrohhmpefrvght vghrucfvohguugcuoehpvghtvgesphgvthgvrhhtohguugdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepkeefheehleehhfehheegiedvvdejfeeggedvffdtueegteevvdejudeltdei ffefnecuffhomhgrihhnpehpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuih iivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphgvthgvsehpvghtvghrthhouggu rdhorhhg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 26 Jul 2022 10:37:38 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2022 16:27:56 +0200 From: Peter Todd To: alicexbt , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion , alicexbt via bitcoin-dev , Aaradhya Chauhan User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CD1F5D4-9260-4BE7-B710-993955AB58C8@petertodd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Regarding setting a lower minrelaytxfee X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2022 14:37:46 -0000 On July 26, 2022 2:19:32 PM GMT+02:00, alicexbt via bitcoin-dev wrote: >Hi Aaradhya, > >> As it's not a consensus rule, I think it can be done easily, just needi= ng support from full node operators > >A few miners will need to use a lower minrelaytxfee for this to work=2E I= don't think miners would want to lower their profits=2E Whether or not this lowers profits for a particular miner is complex: https://petertodd=2Eorg/2016/block-publication-incentives-for-miners But to a first approximation, at any fee above zero failing to mine a tx y= ou know about is leaving money on the table=2E Anyway even if miners don't actually mine these txs by themselves, with Ch= ild-Pays-For-Parent, allowing near-zero txs into your mempool potentially a= llows you to mine more fees=2E