To: William Morriss <wjmelements@gmail.com>,
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	Ben Kloester <benkloester@gmail.com>
References: <CADpM8jr_RrbPXLx6Up8HMW-fv=noFLjy817dfsFdYTg216Pu7w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANgJ=T8ZHbC4R3Rs5kZG8HfGs8810jj01WN4Ssiketej0md4kA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADpM8jq_-JxCmLiCPMG2ZVuYxZH7KOCyyMaQnBay18PQLPvmRg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
Message-ID: <61fa604f-29c8-c1f2-fc49-45a5e8263bfa@voskuil.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 04:03:30 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADpM8jq_-JxCmLiCPMG2ZVuYxZH7KOCyyMaQnBay18PQLPvmRg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature";
	boundary="TS74TNVEcUkuoLWgOjWLodiHqiGvxSRKM"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Idea: Marginal Pricing
Precedence: list

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--TS74TNVEcUkuoLWgOjWLodiHqiGvxSRKM
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="WCw8OJRlaHX03xNv5DE4v1rQCddi5uQIB";
 protected-headers="v1"
From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
To: William Morriss <wjmelements@gmail.com>,
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
 Ben Kloester <benkloester@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <61fa604f-29c8-c1f2-fc49-45a5e8263bfa@voskuil.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Idea: Marginal Pricing
References: <CADpM8jr_RrbPXLx6Up8HMW-fv=noFLjy817dfsFdYTg216Pu7w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANgJ=T8ZHbC4R3Rs5kZG8HfGs8810jj01WN4Ssiketej0md4kA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADpM8jq_-JxCmLiCPMG2ZVuYxZH7KOCyyMaQnBay18PQLPvmRg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADpM8jq_-JxCmLiCPMG2ZVuYxZH7KOCyyMaQnBay18PQLPvmRg@mail.gmail.com>

--WCw8OJRlaHX03xNv5DE4v1rQCddi5uQIB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 11/29/2017 10:13 PM, William Morriss via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Ben Kloester <benkloester@gmail.com
> <mailto:benkloester@gmail.com>> wrote:
>=20
>     Something similar to this has been proposed  in this article by Ron=

>     Lavi, Or Sattath, and Aviv Zohar, and discussed in this bitcoin-dev=

>     thread https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017=
-September/015093.html
>=20
>     They only discussed changing the fee structure, not removing the
>     block size limit, as far as I know.
>=20
>         "Redesigning Bitcoin's fee market"
>         https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.08881 <https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.08=
881>
>=20
>     *Ben Kloester*
>=20
> Thanks. Marginal pricing is equivalent to the "Monopolistic Price
> Mechanism" discussed in https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.08881
> The mechanism is the same, including
> the block size adjustment, but as you noted the prior discussion only
> concerns the fee structure.
>=20
> It looks like the prior proposal broke down because of Peter Todd's
> concern with out-of-band payments
> (https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-September=
/015103.html).
> Restated, miners can circumvent the system through out of band payments=
=2E
> Mark Friedenbach argues that out-of-band payments are penalized in part=

> because the end-user could have just as easily bid higher instead of
> paying OOB. Peter Todd argues that a miner could mine only out-of-band
> transactions. Such transactions could have no on-chain fees and thus be=

> disregarded by other miners.
>=20
> I believe this OOB scenario is imaginary. Either it would be more
> profitable for a miner to mine fairly, or cheaper for the end-user to
> pay the fee in-band.=20
> Consider MINFEE to the the effective fee paid for
> the block mined by the OOB-incentivized miner. Consider MARKFEE to the
> the market fee collected by non-OOB-incentivized miners. Call the OOB
> effective tx fee OOB. Then,
> For a user to prefer OOB: MINFEE+OOB<MARKFEE
> For a miner to prefer OOB: MINFEE+OOB>MARKFEE
> It is impossible for both scenarios to be true. As previously argued by=

> Mark Friedenbach, the system disincentivizes OOB tx fees.

Bitcoin is neutral on how miners are paid. The benefit of on-chain fee
payment is that a fee can be paid with no communication between the
miner and the merchant, preserving anonymity. It also serves as a
convenience that anonymous fees are published, as it provides a basis
for anonymous fee estimation. There is no centralization pressure that
arises from side fees.

https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin/wiki/Side-Fee-Fallacy

> I don't think there is any more centralization pressure with marginal
> fees than before. What prevents miners from colluding to move tx fees
> OOB is the value of the on-band pending tx fees. The hashpower of
> individual miners is not impressive compared to the entire network, so
> individual miners could not offer a service to speed up confirmation
> that would be superior to simply doing a RBP. OOB fees are perhaps a
> symptom of the current setup, wherein there is no penalty for
> arbitrarily favoring individual transactions with lower fees.


--WCw8OJRlaHX03xNv5DE4v1rQCddi5uQIB--

--TS74TNVEcUkuoLWgOjWLodiHqiGvxSRKM
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJaH/OSAAoJEDzYwH8LXOFOR0sH/iOianu1Pz+BFrkYOZRNxE/e
FmYVKZnhwgI4WgGrfxeH0/Qb807NwMqgUmNkl1CFvNuNoJ+cj7UAdyMnh5rS6rVI
mPNR42q69QKpaqY2EJDOrzDYFP3KJ7kPc2Z6l860Eb77aLnHRUh4ZlygCZYSL9fX
fJd/hhHQAfYEOihmhjwLWDSRWsisFX6nm4QKxzZ4ku5T03nFKKNPlImjoEGLiuSj
ddnjIyzrzlQX9mgiVidv4uP4m9ViSuJgwIcadhjncj0EfAVOWt7DksTV94C6QGiU
PtD+NmPHLEPGEPdnK4rD9yuYlTExu6SgQjqUiOWkKUuwRkTAWXH6WUAndkUB0us=
=dpRS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--TS74TNVEcUkuoLWgOjWLodiHqiGvxSRKM--